Skip to main content

Full text of "Rise and growth of the Anglican schism"

See other formats















, tnttf) ntr0tmctt 0n antj 











DAUPHIN . . . . . . 7 




BOLEYN . . . . . . -1 













APPEALS TO THE POPE . . . . 5 1 



LAWYERS ..... .56 











POPE . . . . . . -95 





SIR THOMAS MORE . . . . 1 1 7 




CROMWELL . . . .129 





OF THE KING . . 160 


SADLER ....... 167 


WEST AND IN NORFOLK . . . . .178 




CAMBRIDGE . . . . . .189 








KINGDOM .... 2I 9 



ELIZABETH . . . 22& 




SYNOPSIS . . . . . .237 







OF THE COUNTRY ...... 254 


IN THE NEW RELIGION . . . . .264 


RIAGE OF THE CLERGY . . . . .270 






AND WESTMORELAND . . . . .292 







OF THE PERSECUTION . . . . .318 










THE earliest and the most trustworthy account which we 
possess of the great changes in Church and State that 
were wrought in the reign of Henry VIII. was written 
by the celebrated Dr. Nicolas Sander, and published in 
the year of our Lord 1585, at Cologne, with the following 
title : 

" Doctissimi viri Nicolai Sanderi, de origine ac progressu Schismatis Angli 
can! liber. Continens historian! niaxime ecclesiasticam, annorum circiter 
sexaginta, lectu dignissimam : nimirum, ab anno 21 regni Henrici 8 quo pri- 
mum cogitare coepit de repudianda legitima uxore serenissima Catherina, 
usque ad hunc vigesimum septimum Elizabethse, quse ultima est ejusdem 
Henrici soboles. Editus et auctus per Edouardum Kishtonum. Prsecipua 
capita totius operis post praefationem authoris continentur. Colonise 
Agrippinse, Anno Domini, 1585." 

His work was sent to the printers after the death of 
the author, as may be gathered from the title-page, by 
the Eev. Edward Eishton, missionary priest, who added 
to it the Fourth Book. 

Dr. Sander himself had made some progress in his 
account of the reign of Elizabeth, but as he had not 
perfectly arranged it for the press, Mr. Eishton thought 
it best to supply its place, as he has done, with the 
clear and accurate sketch, which is here called the con 
tinuation of the history. 



Edward Kishton, the first editor of Dr. Sanders 
account of the rise of the Anglican Schism, was "de 
scended," according to Tanner, "from an ancient and 
honourable family in the county of Lancaster -familia 
antiqua et generosa in agro Lancastriensi oriundus " 
and entered Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1568, when 
Elizabeth was queen of England. 

Having finished his course, he took his degree of B.A. 
in 1572, and in the following year entered the new 
seminary at Douai, then newly founded by William, 
afterwards Cardinal, Allen; for among those who, 
according to the register of the seminary, began to 
study theology on the feast of St. Eemi, October i, 1573, 
was Edward Bishton of the diocese of Chester. 1 

The seminary was an offence to queen Elizabeth and 
her ministers, who stirred up the heretics at Douai 2 to 
molest the English students whom Cardinal Allen had 
brought together. The molestations which the semin 
arists had to endure were so serious that it was resolved 
to remove into a more peaceful city. John Wright, 
B.D., and Edward Kishton were therefore sent to 
Kheims, November 10, 1576, to prepare the way for the 
migration thither of their brethren in Douai, if a place 
could be found for them, and if the University of Eheims 
were disposed to receive them with goodwill. 3 

On Easter Eve in the following year, April 7, 1577, 
Mr. Kishton was ordained priest at Cambrai, 4 and on 
the second Sunday after Easter, April 21, said Mass for 
the first time. He sang on that day the high Mass at 

1 Collegii Anglo-Duaceni Diarimn, 3 Collegii Anglo-Duaceni Diarium, 
Diar. i. p. 5. Diar. ii. p. 113. 

2 See bk. iv. chap. viii. p. 298. 4 Ibid., p. 1 18. 


the high altar of the parish church, according to the rite 
there in use ; but the priests who were trained at Douai, 
vexatione dante intellectum, abandoned the local rites to 
which their forefathers had been accustomed in England, 
and said Mass according to the Eoman rite, in obedience 
to the decrees of St. Pius V. 1 He left Douai August 2 
of this year, and went to Borne 2 to perfect his theological 
learning. On the i8th of April 1580 he left Borne, 3 and 
on the last day of May was in the seminary, then in 
Bheims, together with the future martyr, Edmund Cam- 
pian, of the Society of Jesus, and the celebrated Father 
Persons. Six other priests also were there on that day, 
two of whom, Balph Sherwin and Luke Kirby, who had 
left Borne with him, not long after obtained the crown 
of the martyrs in England. 4 

Mr. Bishton left Bheims on the 5th day of June, and 
made his way to England ; but " the feet swift to shed 
blood " overtook him, and he was seized, imprisoned, 
tried, and condemned to death. 5 That sentence, how 
ever, was not executed, but he was kept a prisoner in the 
Tower, out of which he was taken January 2 1, 1585, and 
placed on board a vessel, and cast ashore on the coast of 
Normandy, by orders of Elizabeth. He reached Bheims 
on the 3d of March, and then went to Paris, where he 
met his friend, who prevailed upon him to publish this 
work of Dr. Sander. But during his imprisonment in 
the Tower of London he kept a diary, in which he 
recorded from time to time the merciless tortures to 
which the Catholics within its walls were subjected by 

1 Collegii Anglo-Duaceni Diarium, 3 Ibid., Appen., p. 297. 
Diar. ii. p. 118. 4 Ibid., p. 166. 

2 Ibid., p. 126. 5 See bk. iv. chap, ix. p. 313, note 2. 


the ministers of Elizabeth. The diary was published 
after his death, at the end of the edition of Dr. Sander s 
work which was printed in Home, 1587, and remains as 
a record of savage cruelty perpetrated by people who 
professed, and even practised, the utmost licence in 
matters of religion ; but labouring, as is always the habit 
of people so professing, under the most perfect incapacity 
of allowing to others the same deplorable liberty, or 
even tolerating the only religion that is true. From 
Paris he went to Pont-a-Mousson, but did not remain 
there because of the breaking out therein of a grave 
disease, not, however, escaping the danger he hoped to 
avoid, for he became seriously ill at Ste. Menehould, where 
he departed this life to receive the reward of his good 

The day of his death, according to the Douai diary, 
was June 29, 1585, but it is not improbable that the 
report brought to the seminary at Kheims may have 
been inexact, or perhaps entered in the wrong place in 
the diary. Mr. Kishton has told the story of Alfield and 
Webley, who were put to death July 6 because they 
had brought into the country a book of Cardinal Allen. 
He must therefore have lived beyond the 2Qth of June. 
Still further, he has mentioned the deportation of priests 
in September of that year, and it may be that he lived 
even to see the beginning of 1586. 

On the other side may be said that the positive testi 
mony of the Douai diary is too clear to be set aside, for 
the printers in Cologne may have added the story of 
Alfield and "Webley, and the deportation of the priests, 
in order to make the history complete down to the day 


in which they were printing the continuation of Mr. 

Nicolas Sander, the author of the work edited by Mr. 
Rishton, was descended from an ancient and honour 
able family, which in the reign of king John was 
settled in Sanderstead, in the county of Surrey. The 
head of the house at that time seems to have been 
William Sander, who, dying without issue, left his lands 
in that parish to the monastery of Hyde, near Winches 
ter, and in the reign of Henry III. the monks entered 
into possession. In his other estates he was succeeded 
by his brother, and in the reign of Edward II. the 
family was settled at Sander Place, or Charlwood Place, 
in the parish of Charlwood, in the same county of Surrey. 

In the beginning of the sixteenth century the head of 
the family was Nicolas Sander of Charlwood, whose son, 
Sir Thomas Sander, was high sheriff of Surrey, A.D. 1553. 
The high sheriff of the same county, A.D. 1556, was 
William Sander of Aston, a younger brother of Nicolas 
Sander, the father of Sir Thomas. William Sander of 
Aston married Elizabeth Mynes, who in her widowhood 
went into exile that she might keep the faith, 1 and of 
that marriage there was issue twelve children, of whom 
Nicolas Sander was one. Two daughters entered reli 
gion, and were professed in the monastery of Sion. 
Margaret, the elder, was prioress under Catherine Palmer, 

1 De Visibili Monarcliia Ecclesise, Cliristo ab infantia dedicavit, duas 

p. 686, Wirceburg, 1592. " Nee filias sanctissimo D. Brigittse mo- 

mihi [Nicolao Sandero] fas est Elisa- nasterio tradidit, ubi ambao lauda- 

betliam. Gulielmi Sanderi patris mei biliter degunt, quarura natu major, 

olim uxorem, nunc viduam clarissi- Margareta sub Catherina Palmera 

mam matrem meam, hac eadem sanctissima ejus conventus abbatissa 

laude privare quee preeter me quern priorissse locum tenet." 


who recovered possession of the monastery in the reign of 
Mary, and who was forced to abandon it under Elizabeth. 

Another daughter was married to Henry Pits of 
Hampshire, and was the mother of John Pits, to whom 
we owe the great work " De Illustribus Anglise Scrip- 
toribus," printed in Paris, A.D. 1619. 

Nicolas was born at Charlwood, A.D. 1527, and was 
educated in the famous school of William of Wykeham, 
in Winchester ; from that school he went to the New 
College of its founder, in Oxford, of which he was ad 
mitted scholar, August 6, 1546, and then fellow two 
years afterwards, August 6, 1548. He applied himself 
to the study of canon law, and took his degree in that 

In 1557 he gave public lectures as Shaggling 1 profes 
sor, 2 and in the next year he must have been known 
as a theologian as well as a canonist he was professor 
of divinity either in his own right or as the deputy of 
Eichard Bruern. 3 

He resigned his fellowship and left England in 1561, 
never afterwards to set foot within it. Sir Francis 
Englefield, preferring banishment and the loss of his 
estates to the loss of the faith, went abroad, and took 
Nicolas Sander with him. And Sander was not un- 

1 & "Wood (History and Antiquities or from a bishop or "bishops, or from 

of the University of Oxford, vol. ii. a noble person, or others." 

901) says that the Shaggling lee- 2 De Visibili Monarchia, lib. vii. 

tures were "lectures that were ex- n. 1833, p. 676, ed. Wirceburg. 

traordinary or temporary, allowed " Nicolaus Sanderus, qui tanquam 

either by public authority, common regius professor jus canonicum suo 

consent, or recommendations. Their jure in Oxonio publice prselegit, ei 

readers also were called Shaggling loco et muneri ob fidem conservan- 

lecturers, and did receive if they dam renuntians, etposteasacrsetheo- 

read not out of goodwill allowance logiae professor factus hunc librum ad 

from the students of the university, communem utilitatem conscripsit." 

or from colleges, or from the king, 3 a Wood, p. 849. 


grateful, for he has left on record his great obligations 
to Sir Francis, who, he says, was his chief support for 
the twelve years which passed between his going abroad 
and the publication of his great book on the " Monarchy 
of the Church." 1 

On leaving England he went to Borne, where he was 
created doctor in divinity, and was ordained priest by 
Thomas Goldwell, the exiled bishop of St. Asaph. 2 In 
Eome he became known to the great Hosius, Cardinal 
Bishop of Ermland, who took him with him when he 
went as Legate of the Pope to Trent, and kept him also 
in attendance upon himself during his laborious mission 
in Poland, Prussia, and Lithuania. 

Keleased from his attendance on the Cardinal, Dr. San 
der went to Louvain, which was a true city of refuge to the 
English persecuted by the heretics, and was made regius 
professor of theology in that university. During his 
residence there he finished his great work, " De Visibili 
Monarchia Ecclesise, Lib. viii.," which was printed A.D. 
1571, by John Fowler, like himself an exile, who had 
married one of the daughters of John Harris, once the 
secretary of Sir Thomas More. 

In the early part of the year 1572, St. Pius V. sent 
for Sander from Louvain, and his friends believed that 
His Holiness was about to raise him to the purple. The 
Pope died on the ist day of May, and it may be that 
Dr. Sander was sent for that he might proceed to Spain ; 
for he was in Madrid in November 1573, as appears 

1 De Visibili Monarchia, 1892. sumptu ejusdem per hos duodecini 

" Pupillos Dei quos fovere, et suis annos potissimum alar et sustenter." 

opibus pascere nunquam destitit, me- 2 Ibid., 1602. "^ Qui milii maims 

que in primis, cum et ductu ejus presbyterii Romro imposuit." 
Angliam ab initio reliquerim, et 


from a paper in the Eecord Office, 1 an extract from which, 
has been most kindly furnished to the writer by the 
Eev. Father Knox, D.D., of the London Oratory. 

At this time he was writing his history of the An 
glican Schism. 2 

He was again in Spain in 1577 with the Nuncio 
Monsignor Sega, bishop, then of Eipa Tranzone, and 
afterwards Cardinal bishop of Piacenza. 

From Spain he went as Nuncio of His Holiness 
Gregory XIII. to Ireland, where he landed in 1 5 79, and 
where he is said to have died of want, hunted to death 
by the agents of Elizabeth, A.D. 1580, according to Pits ; 
but A.D. 1583, according to Camden ; and according to 
another account, in the woods of Clenlis, A.D. 1582. 
Lord Burghley, who in "The Execution of Justice" 
calls him " a lewde schollar " he was as well born and 
well bred as his reviler says that, "wandering in the 
mountaines in Ireland without succour," he " died rav 
ing in a phrensey." 

The name and writings of Dr. Sander are in honour 
among all people except his own. There is no stain 
upon his character : he was honest, fearless, and spoke 
plainly, without respect of persons, according to the 
obligations of his state. His writings are grave, solid, 
and learned, without conceit or affectation, showing the 
simplicity and directness of his nature. Grave histori 
ans have been satisfied if they found a fact told by him; 
and it is not improbable that the reason why his country- 

1 Dom. Eliz. Add., vol. xxiii. n. 61. 2 See below, p. 100. 

" Doctor; Sanders cam from Bom to 
Madredyn November 1573." 


men dealt so hardly with his name is founded on their 
conviction that his authority was too great to be over 
turned by any means except those which some of them 
too readily adopted scurrilous railing. Thus Dr. Cox, 
tutor to Edward VI., and under Elizabeth bishop of Ely, 
writing to Rodolph Gualter, February 1572, speaks as 
follows of him : 

" There came out last summer an immense volume 
monstrosum volumen cujusdam Nicolai Sanderi by 
one Nicolas Saunders, who is, they say, a countryman 
of ours, the title of which is The Monarchy of the 
Church/ He appears to have been a mercenary em 
ployed by certain Cardinals, aided by the assistance of 
others, and decked out like .ZEsop s jackdaw." * 

Dr. Cox thus wrote of the book in the fulness of his 
knowledge; for as late as August 26 in the following year, 
1573, he says, "I have not seen the book of Nicolas 
Saunders about Monarchy : should I see it, and think 
it deserving of an answer, I will do as the Lord shall 
enable me." : 

Then when men heard of his history of the Anglican 
Schism, they allowed themselves a licence, probably un- 
parallelled, in dealing with the author. Francis Mason, 3 
in his " Vindication of the Church of England," thus speaks 
of the book his words are thus rendered by Lindsey : 

" Though in that libel of Sanders, concerning] the 
schism, the number of lies may seem to vie with the 
multitude of lines." 

1 Zurich Letters, ist series, No. 3 Vindicise Eccles. Anglican., lib. 
167, ed. Parker Society. The trans- iii. c. 9. " Quamquam in famoso isto 
lation is by Dr. Hastings Robinson. Sanderi de Schismate libello, men- 

2 Ibid., 2d series, No. 94. daciorum mimerus cum linearum 

multitudine certare videatur." 


" He was the first man/ says Camden, 1 " that broached 
that damnable lie concerning the birth of queen Eliza 
beth s mother, which no man in those days though 
the hatred and malice of the Papists was then fresh 
against her, and might remember it ever knew, Eng 
land in full forty years after never heard of, the com 
putation of time doth egregiously convince of falsehood 
and vanity, and he, forgetting himself, which a liar 
should not do, doth himself plainly confute. Yet 
are there some ill-disposed people who blush not at 
this day to beslur their writings with so impudent a 

Heylyn, 2 calling him Dr. Slanders, speaks of " his 
pestilent and seditious book, entituled 6 De Schis- 
mate Anglicano/ whose frequent falsehoods make him 
no fit author to be built on in any matter of import 


Strype, whose knowledge ought to have made him 
more careful of speech, uses the words, " Sanders, in his 
lying book of the English Schism ; " 3 and in another 
place 4 he thus reviles him : "A most profligate fellow, a 
very slave to the Koman See, and a sworn enemy to his 
own country, caring not what he writ, if it might but 
throAV reproach and dirt enough upon the reforming 
kings and princes, the reformers and the reformation." 
One " who made himself afterwards so famous for his 
slanderous accounts of the reformation, and for his zeal 

1 Annals of queen Elizabeth, ad 3 Life of Cranmer, bk. i. chap, 
an. 1583, in Rennet s History of xviii. 

England. 4 Eccles. Memorials, ii. ii. p. 

2 Ecclesia Kestaurata, pt. iii. p. 180. 


in raising rebellions in Ireland against queen Eliza 
beth." 1 V 

" He was almost as bad an historian," says Collier, 2 
" as he was a subject ; but his falsehoods having been 
detected at large already, I shall refer the reader to that 

The " performance " to which Collier sends the reader 
is the " History of the Reformation," by Gilbert Bur- 
net, D.D., bishop of Salisbury ; moreover, a " perform 
ance " for which Collier had no respect himself. 

" Liars by a frequent custom grow to such a habit," 
writes Burnet 3 and there have been people who said 
that Burnet knew it well "that in the commonest things 
they cannot speak truth, even though it might conduce 
to their ends more than their lies do. Sanders had so 
given himself up to vent reproaches and lies, that he 
often does it for nothing, without any end but to carry 
on a trade that had been so long driven by him that he 
knew not how to lay it down." 

Dr. Sander, according to the same writer, 4 " intended 
to represent the reformation in the foulest shape that 
was possible; to defame queen Elizabeth, to stain her 
blood, and therefore to bring her title to the crown in 
question ; and to magnify the authority of the See of 
Kome, and celebrate monastic orders with all the praises 
and high characters he could devise : and therefore, 
after he had writ several books on these subjects with 
out any considerable success, they being all rather filled 
with foul calumnies and detracting malice than good 

1 Eccles. Memorials, iii. ii. p. 29. 3 Hist, of the Reformation, v. p. 
Oxford, 1822. 585, ed. Pocock. 

2 Eccles. History, ii. p. 588. 4 Ibid., iv. p. 583. 


arguments or strong sense, lie resolved to try his skill 
another way, so he intended to tell a doleful tale which 
should raise a detestation of heresy, an ill opinion of the 
queen, cast a stain on her blood and disparage her title, 
and advance the honour of the Papacy." 

Dr. Sander certainly did commit to writing the hor 
rible story of Anne Boleyn s birth, but it is not proved 
that he was either the first or the only one to do so, 
still less clear is it that he invented the " doleful tale." 
All that is certain and clear is that he believed the story 
to be true. In this he may have been in error, as other 
historians have been in error concerning many facts 
which they confidently related. 

He says distinctly that Anne Boleyn was the daugh 
ter of Henry VII I., and he says also with equal distinct 
ness that she was so considered during her lifetime. 
Now, as Dr. Sander could not have been more than nine 
years old at the utmost when Anne Boleyn came to her 
unhappy end, and when the story of her birth was 
published in the streets of Paris,i few people will 
venture to say with Camden that he was the first person 
primus omnium " that broached that damnable lie 
concerning the birth of queen Elizabeth s mother." 

If Dr. Sander had been silent on one point, the 
morals of Anne Boleyn, it is probable that he might 
have been held to be an accurate historian. But as he 
has not been silent, his adversaries have been content 
to use the information he has supplied us, and to repay 
him with senseless abuse. The writers of a certain kind 
seem to agree in chanting the praise of Anne Boleyn, 

1 See "below, bk. i. chap. xvii. p. 135, note i. 


and indeed Dr. Burnet admits that it is necessary to 
maintain the perfect honesty of that person, because 
the true story of her life " derogates so much from the 
first reformers." 

As to the reputation of Anne Boleyn, Dr. Sander 
did it no harm. It is true that the weight of his 
authority is added to the testimony of others, but he is 
neither the first nor the loudest in publishing the 
matters which make the life of Anne Boleyn so sad, for 
Simon Grynseus 2 speaks of her as a woman entitled to no 
respect. Mr. Pocock 3 has produced proofs that she was 
evil spoken of at a time when Dr. Sander had probably 
learned neither to write nor to read. The French am 
bassador did not spare her, 4 and the king s own sister, 
the duchess of Suffolk, is said to have uttered " oppro 
brious language " against her. 5 

The evil temper of Dr. Sander is supposed to have 
found satisfaction in decrying the person of Anne 
Boleyn ; but even in this he is not singular, for in the 
Venetian Calendar of State Papers, 6 edited by Mr. 
Eawdon Brown, is a contemporary account of Anne, not 
more fiattering than that of Dr. Sander. 

" Madame Anne," says the writer, " is not one of the 
handsomest women in the world : she is of middling 
stature, swarthy complexion, long neck, wide mouth, 
bosom not much raised, and in fact has nothing but 
the English king s great appetite and her eyes, which 
are black and beautiful." 

That is an account of Anne Boleyn in October 1532, 

1 See the passages quoted below. 4 Le Grand, iii. 325. 

2 p 2 6 no te 2. 5 Venetian Calendar, Kawdon 

3 Records of "the Reformation, ii. Brown, iv. 761. 
pp. 468, 566. 6 ibid., iv. 824. 


when she was living "like a queen at Calais," accompanied 
by the king "to Mass and everywhere, as if she was such." 

Dr. Sander clearly was not writing without know 
ledge, nor was he the slave of his resentments or his 
passions. Others before him had written of Anne Boleyn 
as he has done. His praise of queen Catherine and his 
dislike of Anne Boleyn were not his own, for he has but 
faithfully represented the times he has described. In 
1531 an eyewitness gives the following account of 
them : 1 

" There is now living with him [Henry] a young 
woman of noble birth, though many say of bad char 
acter, whose will is law to him, and he is expected to 
marry her, should the divorce take place, which, it is 
supposed, will not be effected, as the peers of the realm, 
both spiritual and temporal, and the people, are opposed 
to it : nor during the present queen s life will they have 
any other queen in the kingdom. Her majesty is pru 
dent and good, and during these differences with the 
king she has evinced constancy and resolution, never 
being disheartened or depressed." 

Again Lodovico Falier, in his report to the Senate, 
November 10, 1 53 1, 2 says: 

" The queen [Catherine] is of low stature, rather 
stout, with a modest countenance ; she is virtuous, just, 
replete with goodness and religion ; she speaks Spanish, 
Flemish, French, and English ; she is beloved by the 
islanders more than any queen that ever reigned." 

About the same time the French ambassador in 
Venice receives the following news : 3 

1 Venetian Calendar, Rawdon 2 Ibid., iv. 694. 

Brown, iv. 682. 3 Ibid., iv. 701. 


"It is said that more than seven weeks ago a mob of 
from seven to eight thousand women of London went 
out of the town to seize Boleyn s daughter, the sweet 
heart of the king of England, who was supping at a 
villa in una casa di piacere on a river ; the king not 
being with her ; and having received notice of this she 
escaped by crossing the river in a boat. The women 
had intended to kill her, and amongst the mob were 
many men disguised as women ; nor has any great 
demonstration been made about this, because it was a 
thing done by women." 

These things were said and done when Dr. Sander was 
a baby, and by persons whom he probably never saw. 
The writers say that which he has said ; and if they are 
trustworthy reporters of things seen and heard by them, 
it is not reasonable to say that Dr. Sander is not to be 
believed merely because he also reports the same doings 
and the same words. 

Dr. Sander was not inventing, but at best repeating 
that which he had heard from others, seeing that the 
reader is referred by him to Kastall s Life of Sir Thomas 
More for the fact he puts on record in his history of 
the Anglican Schism. Camden seems not to have ob 
served the reference, or if he did, to have passed over it 
in silence. 

Dr. Burnet was a bolder man : he not only contra 
dicts Dr. Sander, but denies also that Eastall ever wrote 
a Life of Sir Thomas More. The passage is not very 
short, but it deserves to be read. If the story of the 
birth of Anne Boleyn 


" Were true," writes Burnet, 1 " very much might be drawn from it, 
both to disparage king Henry, who pretended conscience to annul his 
marriage for the nearness of affinity, and yet would after that marry 
his own daughter. It leaves also a foul and lasting stain both on the 
memory of Anne Boleyn, and of her incomparable daughter, queen 
Elizabeth. It also derogates so much from the first reformers, who 
had some kind of dependence on queen Anne Boleyn, that it seems to 
be of great importance, for directing the reader in the judgment he is 
to make of persons and things, to lay open the falsehood of this 
account. It were sufficient for blasting it, that there is no proof pre 
tended to be brought for any part of it, but a book of one Kastall, a 
judge, that was never seen by any other person than that writer. 
The title of the book is * The Life of Sir Thomas More. There is 
great reason to think that Rastall never writ any such book ; for it 
is most common for the lives of great authors to be prefixed to their 
works. Now this Rastall published all More s works in queen Mary s 
reign, to which if he had written his life, it is likely he would have 
prefixed it. No evidence, therefore, being given for his relation, either 
from record or letters, or the testimony of any person who was "privy 
to the matter, the whole is to be looked on as a black forgery, devised 
on purpose to defame queen Elizabeth." 

Burnet s denial of the existence of the Life of Sir 
Thomas More, by William Kastall, seems to have had 
no weight with Tanner, for he in his " Bibliotheca Bri- 
tannico-Hibernica," p. 617, assigns to Kastall a Life of 
Sir Thomas More. Pits, before him, mentions a Life of 
Sir Thomas More among the works assigned to Kastall, 
and as Tanner was not ignorant of the writings of 
Burnet, the agreement of Tanner with Pits is distinctly 
an act of disbelief in the confident declamation of 
Burnet ; and be the history of Kastall s work what it 
may, it is clear that Dr. Tanner trusted to the authority 
of Pits, and admitted the existence of the book which 
Burnet had so rashly denied. 

1 Hist. Reform., i. p. 83, ed. Pocock. 


Lord Herbert in his Life of Henry VIII. does not 
seem to have had any doubts of the existence of that 
Life of Sir Thomas More which Dr. Burnet has called 
in question. He says of the stories told of Anne Boleyn, 
that they were "foul calumnies/ and he had therefore 
no interest in admitting that Dr. Sander was but relating 
that which he had learned from others and not invented 

"This author/ says lord Herbert, meaning Dr. 
Sander, " though learned, but more credulous than be 
comes a man of exact judgment, reports out of one 
William Eastall, a judge, in his Life of Sir Thomas 
More, that Mistress Anne Boleyn was the king s 
daughter by the wife of Sir Thomas Boleyn, while sub 
specie honoris he was employed by the kiog, ambas 
sador in France/ Lord Herbert knew of no reason for 
denying that the Life of Sir Thomas More had been 
written by Eastall, and that it contained the story of 
Anne Boleyn s birth. Neither does he abuse Dr. Sander 
as a forger or liar ; he thinks him indeed too credulous, 
but credulity is quite consistent with honesty ; and he 
admits him to be a learned man, and therefore allows 
his readers to believe that Dr. Sander did take this story 
from the Life of Sir Thomas More, written by William 

Though the Life itself seems to be at present unknown, 
there is some evidence that it did once exist, for in the 
British Museum is a MS., 1 the title of which is " Certain 
Briefe Notes appertaining to Bishop Fisher, collected 
out of Sir Thomas More s Life, written by Mr. Justice 

1 Arundel MSS. 152, art. 3, fol. 264. 



Now, if Dr. Sander was the forger he is said to have 
been, he must have been unwise in referring to any 
book at all, for no one will surely venture to say that 
he either foresaw or brought about the rarity of the 
MS. When Kishton prepared the history of the schism 
for the press, he too believed that there was other autho 
rity for the story than that of Dr. Sander, seeing that 
he either left on the margin, or inserted himself, the 
reference to Eastall. Kishton and his friend to whom 
he gave the book for publication are also more or less 
involved in the forgery, and deserve more severe blame 
than Dr. Sander, for they, without any excuse, made 
more public still the calumny said to be the offspring 
of spite. 

Kishton was sent out of the country against his will, 
and hoped to return for the sake of preserving the faith 
among us, nevertheless he published this story. He 
could have done no greater harm to the Catholics he 
left behind, or to those who intended to enter the king 
dom as priests, if the story was either unknown before 
or an invention of Dr. Sander, for it was carried into 
all lands; the book containing it went through many 
editions, and was translated into French, Italian, 
Spanish, and German while Elizabeth was still living. 
It was a wanton and utterly inexplicable insult not only 
to Elizabeth, but to all who acknowledged her as queen, 
whether subjects or allies, and under the circumstances 
a most grievous wrong done to the Catholics, whom 
Elizabeth and her ministers were daily harassing. 

Kishton and others, driven out of the country, were 
thrown upon the charity of good people on the Con- 


tinent, and it was necessary for him, as a priest, to have 
the countenance and support of bishops and priests and 
other honourable men; it is therefore not conceivable 
that he should thus do damage to himself, increase the 
vexations his countrymen were subject to, and disgrace 
the memory, hitherto held in honour, of Dr. Sander, 
whom he professes to respect, and whom he calls a 
saintly man. Certainly Eishton believed the story, and 
he also believed that Dr. Sander believed it. 

Two years after the publication of Dr. Sander s book 
the same story concerning the birth of Anne Boleyn 
was published in Edinburgh by Adam Black wood, 1 a 
lawyer, who lived long in France. He too repeated the 
tale of Anne Boleyn s tainted birth, and of her levity at 
the French court. In the next year, 1588, this book of 
Blackwood was printed again at Antwerp, and being 
written in French it can hardly be supposed that it was 
unknown in France. Yet no voice was raised in contra 
diction, and the story remained in possession. Now, 
whether true or false, it can hardly be said, under these 
conditions, that the history of Anne Boleyn s birth was 
the malicious invention of Dr. Sander. 

Besides, Adam Blackwood was a lawyer defending 
the good name of Mary queen of Scots, whom Elizabeth 
had put to death against all justice, and we must give 
him credit knowing nothing to the contrary that he 
was possessed at least of the common sagacity of his 
profession. He could have done no good to the memory 
of the murdered queen by repeating a story which 
nobody believed, but he might have done harm, and 

1 Martyre de la Keyne d Escosse. Edinburgh. 1587. 


stirred up many to defend Elizabeth, by publishing a 
shameful story which was not true. He told the tale as 
if it were well known and undisputed, and if he did not 
believe it himself, and if others too did not believe it, 
he must have been more or less out of his mind when 
he wrote as he did. 

But in the lifetime of Anne Boleyn herself, in the 
lifetime of her mother and reputed father, and when 
she was ostensibly the king s wife, and queen of Eng 
land publicly crowned, common report at least hinted 
at the fearful stain of her birth. Mr. Pocock l has found 
a paper in the Eecord Office to which he has given the 
following most expressive heading : 

" Accusation brought against a priest named Jackson 
of having charged the king with adultery committed 
with Anne Boleyn and lady Boleyn, March 1533." 

Nicholas Harpsfield, 2 archdeacon of Canterbury, writ 
ing in the reign of Mary, some twenty years before Dr. 
Sander wrote his book, and some thirty years before it 
was printed, says that he " credibly heard reported that 
the king knew the mother of the said Anne Bulleyne." 

Mr. Brewer 3 has lately published a letter of Sir George 
Throgmorton addressed to Henry VIII. , in which the 
writer recounts a conversation he had with Sir Thomas 
Dyngley, afterwards a martyr. Sir George confesses in 
his letter to the king that he had spoken of the king s 
criminal relations with lady Elizabeth Boleyn to the 
king himself. If he had not done so, it is not credible 
that he could have dared so to write to the king, nor is 
it credible that he invented the story. Certainly these 

1 Records, ii. p. 468. 3 Letters and Papers, Henry VIIL, 

2 See p. 98, note 2. vol. iv. Introduction, p. cccxxix. 


reports may have been utterly false, and the fruit of 
malice or perverse imaginations, but it is also certain 
that they did prevail, and as they did prevail, it is cer 
tain that they were not the inventions of Dr. Sander, 
who at the time must have been a youth of ten or 
twelve years of age. 

Mr. Brewer 1 has also found that the reputation of 
lady Elizabeth Boleyn was none of the best. "Mrs. 
Amadas, apparently the wife of the crown jeweller," 
whom he calls "a mad Welshwoman," was brought into 
trouble for saying that Sir Thomas Boleyn did not re 
sent the corruption of his wife and his two daughters. 
Lady Elizabeth Boleyn, Anne s mother, " seems never to 
have been noticed by Katharine," the queen, is another 
statement of the same writer. 2 Now, if queen Catherine 
never "noticed " the wife of Sir Thomas Boleyn, there is 
nothing uncharitable in the supposition that the pure 
and devout queen had some grave reason for her neglect. 
Lady Elizabeth Boleyn was the sister of the duke of 
Norfolk, and the wife of a man high in the good graces 
of the king, nevertheless the queen kept aloof from her, 
and lady Elizabeth remained at the court, where she is 
found even after the trial in the Legatine court, and 
when the shame of her daughter could not be concealed, 
of the woman who was bent on the divorce of Catherine, 
and on taking her place on the throne. Cranmer, 3 writ 
ing to Sir Thomas Boleyn from Hampton Court, June 
I 3, I 53 I ? says, "The king his grace, my lady your 
wife, my lady Anne your daughter, be in good health, 
whereof thanks be to God." 

1 Letters and Papers, Henry 2 Ibid., note i. 
VIII., vol. iv. Introduction, p. 3 Jenkyns, Cranmer s Remains, i. 
-ccxxxii, note 2. p. i. 


Cranmer, the chaplain of the family, seems to have 
his conscience blunted early, and if nothing more had 
been heard of lady Elizabeth Boleyn than this report of 
Cranmer, it need surprise no one that her good name 
was gone. But this is not all. Mr. Pocock 1 has brought 
to light, from the Lansdowne MSS. in the British 
Museum, an account of Anne Boleyn, written during, 
the reign of Elizabeth, agreeing substantially with the 
account given by Dr. Sander, namely, that she was the 
daughter of Henry VIII. Mr. Pocock s observation is, 
" Of whatever value the account given may be, it is 
plainly independent of Sanders narrative." Mr. Pocock 
has so far, then, completely justified Dr. Sander from 
the undeserved charges of lies and forgeries which un 
scrupulous men had brought against him. 

The very reverend M. A. Tierney, canon penitentiary 
of Southwark, showed to the present writer a copy of 
Cardinal Pole s book, "Pro Ecclesiastics Unitatis Defen- 
sio," in which a former possessor had written on the 
margin of p. Ixxvii as follows : 

"Audivi dixisse hoc aliquando ducissam Somerset- 
ensem, et hodie fama est, Annam ipsam, non Thomae 
Bulleni fuisse filiam sed ipsius Henrici 8 vi , qui illam ex 
Bulleni uxore dum vir peregre esset, generasset. Eaque 
ipsa de re regem a Bulleno admonitum antequam rex 
Annam duxisset sed frustra." 

This book had been the property of the reverend 
Edmund Hargatt, 2 February i, 1561, and Mr. Tierney s 
belief was that the note was in the handwriting of the 

1 Records, ii. p. 373. Sander (De Visibili Monarchia Ec- 

2 Among the priests who had clesioe, p. 672, n. 1736, ed. Wirce- 
taken refuge abroad mentioned by burg), is Edmundus Hargattus. 


then owner, who was a priest driven out of the country 
because of the change of religion. 

It is not unreasonable to admit that this note was 
written some twenty years before the publication of Dr. 
Sander s book, and ten or twelve years before Dr. San 
der began to write it. There is also no reason for 
imagining that Mr. Hargatt was writing deliberately 
that which was not true, so we may also admit with him 
that the story of Anne s unhappy birth was very well 
known at the time : "hodie fama est." It was the com 
mon talk before the history of the schism by Dr. Sander 
was ever heard of. 

Sir Thomas More refused to take the oath of succes 
sion as it was offered to him, though he was willing to 
take it provided he was not required to swear at 
the same time that the marriage of Henry and Anne 
Boleyn was valid. It may be imagined that his objec 
tion to that marriage rested on the fact that Henry 
had been married to queen Catherine, and that queen 
Catherine was still living. But that was not his diffi 
culty, though it undoubtedly was a difficulty, at least it 
was not the whole. These are his words in his letter 
to Dr. Wilson : 

"Finally, as touching the oath, the causes for which I 
refused it, no man wotteth what they be, for they be 
secret in mine own conscience : some other, peradven- 
ture, than those that other men would ween, and such 
as I never disclosed unto any man yet, nor never intend 
to do while I live." 

Sir Thomas More kept his secret to himself. It 
could not have been the bigamy of the king, for that 


was universally known, and any one might have guessed 
it. Still further, it is at least very probable, if not certain, 
that the secret reason was not the criminal relations of 
Henry with lady Elizabeth and her daughter Mary, the 
elder sister of Anne. Even if that story were false, it was 
not secret, for Sir George Throgmorton spoke of it to 
the king himself, who would be naturally the last per 
son to hear it from a subject, if it had not been pub 
licly spoken of, and treated as a notorious fact. 

Archdeacon Harpsfield 1 refers to these words of Sir 
Thomas More, and to the reports about lady Elizabeth 
Boleyn and her elder daughter Mary, " of the which im 
pediments," he writes, " Sir Thomas More was not by 
likelihood ignorant, and seemeth to touch them, or such 
like, in these words, among other things, to Dr. Wil 
son." Harpsfield seems to insinuate something further 
as being either known to or suspected by Sir Thomas. 
" Them, or suchlike" is a strange expression. He refers 
again 2 to the fatal marriage and its dissolution in these 
words : 

" You will perchance now ask me what was the 
cause that the king s marriage with the lady Anne was 
never good. Surely, the true cause was that the king 
married her, his true wife living, and so had two wives 
at once, which is by the civil law a thing infamous. If 
you will reply that that was not the cause that the king 
and Parliament found, I grant you, and the more pity." 

About forty years after archdeacon Harpsfield wrote, 
a prebendary of Chichester, Dr. Thomas Stapleton, a 
learned, sober, and grave man, defending himself and 

1 Treatise of Marriage, bk. iii. p. 28, Eyston MS. 2 Ibid., p. 61. 


his countrymen, whom Elizabeth publicly defamed as 
degenerate and seditious men of mean birth. These 
reproaches, said Dr. Stapleton, show weakness of mind ; 
they are most unseemly in her mouth who utters them, 
for she is regarded as the cause of sedition throughout 
the world. She does not resemble the illustrious and 
Catholic race from which she is descended ; nay, nothing 
can be more at variance with the laws of nature than 
her existence. She certainly knows who her mother 
was, but everybody does not who was her father. 1 

The sting of this answer of Stapleton on behalf of his 
outraged companions in exile lies in the words that the 
laws of nature had been departed from as far as it is 
possible, and that the reproach of that departure touched 
Elizabeth. That departure could mean nothing else but 
the story told by Dr. Sander, for the laws of nature 
were not violated, unless it be that her mother was the 
child of her father. 

In the year 1533, Cranmer, in open court styling 
himself Legate of the Apostolic See, even while usurping 
the jurisdiction of that see, contrary to the law pro 
nounced the marriage of Henry and Catherine a nullity, 
and, five days later, pronounced the marriage of Henry 
and Anne Boleyn, contracted before the divorce, to be 
lawful and good. But in 1536, when Anne Boleyn was 
about to pay in her death the price of her unlawful 
rank, the same Cranmer, sitting again, as he says, in 

1 Apologia pro rege Catholico, p. Christianum orbem habetur et quse 

161. " Sed cur tandem hos exules a nobilissimis et Catholicissimis pro- 

seditioses, degeneres et infimo loco avis, imo et db ipsis naturce regulis 

natos esse demmtiat ? Impotentis quam longissime aberrat. Quse de- 

animi sunt heec convitia et ineptis- nique probe novit qua matre nata 

sime a tali persona proficiscuntur, est, cum tamen de patre non inter 

cjuee ipse seditionum fons per totum omnes constet." 


was universally known, and any one might have guessed 
it. Still further, it is at least very probable, if not certain, 
that the secret reason was not the criminal relations of 
Henry with lady Elizabeth and her daughter Mary, the 
elder sister of Anne. Even if that story were false, it was 
not secret, for Sir George Throgmorton spoke of it to 
the king himself, who would be naturally the last per 
son to hear it from a subject, if it had not been pub 
licly spoken of, and treated as a notorious fact. 

Archdeacon Harpsfield 1 refers to these words of Sir 
Thomas More, and to the reports about lady Elizabeth 
Boleyn and her elder daughter Mary, " of the which im 
pediments," he writes, " Sir Thomas More was not by 
likelihood ignorant, and seemeth to touch them, or such 
like, in these words, among other things, to Dr. Wil 
son." Harpsfield seems to insinuate something further 
as being either known to or suspected by Sir Thomas. 
" Them, or suchlike" is a strange expression. He refers 
again 2 to the fatal marriage and its dissolution in these 
words :- 

" You will perchance now ask me what was the 
cause that the king s marriage with the lady Anne was 
never good. Surely, the true cause was that the king 
married her, his true wife living, and so had two wives 
at once, which is by the civil law a thing infamous. If 
you will reply that that was not the cause that the king 
and Parliament found, I grant you, and the more pity." 

About forty years after archdeacon Harpsfield wrote, 
a prebendary of Chichester, Dr. Thomas Stapleton, a 
learned, sober, and grave man, defending himself and 

1 Treatise of Marriage, bk. iii. p. 28, Eyston MS. 2 Ibid., p. 61. 


his countrymen, whom Elizabeth publicly defamed as 
degenerate and seditious men of mean birth. These 
reproaches, said Dr. Stapleton, show weakness of mind ; 
they are most unseemly in her mouth who utters them, 
for she is regarded as the cause of sedition throughout 
the world. She does not resemble the illustrious and 
Catholic race from which she is descended ; nay, nothing 
can be more at variance with the laws of nature than 
her existence. She certainly knows who her mother 
was, but everybody does not who was her father. 1 

The sting of this answer of Stapleton on behalf of his 
outraged companions in exile lies in the words that the 
laws of nature had been departed from as far. as it is 
possible, and that the reproach of that departure touched 
Elizabeth. That departure could mean nothing else but 
the story told by Dr. Sander, for the laws of nature 
were not violated, unless it be that her mother was the 
child of her father. 

In the year 1533, Cranmer, in open court styling 
himself Legate of the Apostolic See, even while usurping 
the jurisdiction of that see, contrary to the law pro 
nounced the marriage of Henry and Catherine a nullity, 
and, five days later, pronounced the marriage of Henry 
and Anne Boleyn, contracted before the divorce, to be 
lawful and good. But in 1536, when Anne Boleyn was 
about to pay in her death the price of her unlawful 
rank, the same Cranmer, sitting again, as he says, in 

1 Apologia pro rege Catholico, p. Christianum orbem habetur et quso 

161. " Sed cur tandem hos exules a nobilissimis et Catholicissimis pro- 

seditioses, degeneres et infimo loco avis, imo et ab ipsis naturce regulis 

natos esse deimntiat ? Impotentis quam longissime aberrat. Quee de- 

animi sunt heec convitia et ineptis- nique probe novit qua matre nata 

sime a tali persona proficiscuntur, est, cum tamen de patre non inter 

qua ipse seditionum fons per totum omnes constet." 


and if the court sat also in the Tower, so that Anne 
might appear before it ; but as there is no trace in the 
letters of Sir William Kingston either that Anne ever 
left the Tower after she had once entered it as a prisoner, 
or that the archbishop held his court for any time there, 
the declaration of Parliament remains unexplained, and 
is certainly at variance with the plain meaning of the 
statement of the archbishop that he had lately "heard 
of the reasons ; for even if the process lasted more than 
one day, the word " lately" would be out of place in 
the sentence. 

Parliament, hoAvever, though it seems to contradict 
the sentence of Cranmer, to darken the matter and shroud 
it in a mist of uncertainty, makes one revelation, not of 
the facts, but of the difficulty or danger of making them 
known. Eepealing the former act of succession, it thus 
speaks : 

" Albeit, most dread sovereign lord, that the said acts 
were then made, as it was then thought by your majesty s 
nobles and commons, upon a pure, perfect, and clear 
foundation, thinking the said marriage then had between 
your highness and the said lady Anne in their con 
sciences to have been pure, sincere, perfect, and good, 
and so was reputed, accepted, and taken in the realm, 
till now of late that God of His infinite goodness, from 
whom no secret things can be hid, hath caused to be 
brought to light evident and open knowledge, as well as 
of certain just, true, and lawful impediments, unknown 
at the making of the said acts, and sithen that time con 
fessed by the said lady Anne before the most reverend 
father in God, Thomas archbishop of Canterbury, metro- 


politan and primate of all England, sitting judicially for 
the same, by the which plainly appeareth that the said 
marriage between your grace and the said lady Anne 
was never good nor consonant to the laws, but utterly 
void and of none effect/ 

Now, if Anne appeared before Cranmer, and confessed, 
either personally or by her proctor, any impediment to 
the marriage, that impediment, according to her confes 
sion, was " unknown " at the time. But it was perfectly 
well known at the time that Henry had a wife then 
living;, and so that cannot be one of the reasons. 


Neither can it be said that Henry or his advisers had 
found out by this time that the marriage with Catherine 
was good and valid, because the princess Mary is 
declared illegitimate ; and that marriage, therefore, was 
still regarded as invalid from the beginning. 

Parliament does not say to whom those reasons were 
"unknown," and it may therefore be understood to say 
that they were unknown to everybody except to Anne, 
who is said to have confessed them. Now the relations 
of Henry with Anne s sister and mother were not 
" unknown " certainly they were not unknown about 
the court ; and if they were " unknown " at any time, it 
was not for Anne Boleyn to confess them. These were 
matters which the king s proctors might have alleged in 
court, as admitted by the king, for he had already 
admitted some of them, seeing that he applied for a 
dispensation from the Pope to marry Anne at the time 
he hoped for the legal dissolution of his first marriage 
with Catherine the queen. 

But if the impediments of which Cranmer and Parlia- 


ment speak were "just, true, and lawful/ it is difficult 
to find more than one reasonable explanation of the 
silence in which they have been buried. Henry made 
no secret of his reasons for getting rid of queen Catherine 
though they were not the true reasons, but legal and 
pleadable reasons if true and it might be expected that 
he should be equally frank in his conduct when he wished 
to dissolve the illegal marriage of Anne Boleyn with 
himself. But he was silent, his ministers are silent, the 
judge whom he allowed to do his work is silent, and the 
reasons why his marriage with Anne Boleyn was a nullity 
have never been divulged. 

Some have proposed, by way of explanation, a contract 
of marriage between Henry Percy, afterwards earl of 
Northumberland, and Anne Boleyn, entered into by them 
when Henry Percy was in the household of Cardinal 
Wolsey and Anne about the court. If that contract had 
ever been made, it would have been an impediment to 
the marriage so long as it subsisted, and no longer ; but 
it did not subsist, it was put an end to by the interfer 
ence of the king, the Cardinal, the earl of Northumber 
land (the young man s father), and finally by the young 
man s marriage, " by means whereof," says Cavendish, 1 
"the former contract was clearly undone." 

But at the time of Anne Boleyn s disgrace, Henry 
Percy, then married and his marriage too must have 
been a nullity, if that of Henry and Anne was a nullity 
denied in the most solemn way conceivable that he 
had ever promised to marry Anne Boleyn. But if the 
pre-contract subsisted, and was the true, just, and lawful 

1 Page 129, ed. Singer. 


impediment, it seems inexplicable why that was not 
said, unless it be that Parliament was ashamed to make 
an impediment diriment of that which was only an im 
pediment impedient. 

Even if the pre-contract subsisted, that is but one 
impediment, and it is not a sufficient explanation of the 
act of Parliament, which speaks of more than one im 
pediment " lawful impediments unknown." The pre 
contract was but one, and it is not credible, if it ever 
subsisted, that it was unknown. Certainly it was not 
unknown to the king, if the account given by Cavendish 
be accurate ; and most certainly it could never cause 
Anne s marriage to be null. 

If there were any " certain just, true, and lawful 
impediments unknown" at the time when Parliament 
declared the marriage of Anne and Henry to be good, 
"undoubtful, true, sincere, and perfect ever hereafter, 
according to the just judgment of the said Thomas arch 
bishop of Canterbury, metropolitan and primate of all 
this realm/ 1 they must have been secret in no ordinary 
way ; for Henry was king of England, and his kindred 
known ; Sir Thomas Boleyn was earl of Wiltshire, Anne 
his daughter marchioness of Pembroke, and lady Wilt 
shire was the sister of the duke of Norfolk : their kindred 
and condition being perfectly well known. 

The impediments of matrimony are known also, and 
among them, for they were but twelve until the Council 
of Trent, there is only one, that of kindred, which can 
have rendered this marriage unlawful and void. It has 
never been said that Henry and Anne were of kin to one 

1 25 Henry VIII. c. 22. 


another by any public and lawful relation. The Tudor 
and the Boleyn families were not bound to each other 
by any ties of marriage on the male or female side. 
They were free to marry, nevertheless there was some 
bond which brought Henry and Anne within the for 
bidden degrees, and the impediment was diriment, seeing 
that the attempted marriage was never any marriage 
at all. If we do not admit this, we must admit that 
Cranmer in pronouncing his sentence, and Parliament in 
making a law, gave utterance to that which is not true, 
without the excuse of necessity ; for the marriage was 
about to be dissolved in another way, namely, by the 
execution of Anne Boleyn. 

We have now the confession of Cranmer, of the two 
Houses of Parliament, and of the king, that the impedi 
ments were not only diriment, but also unknown. Ad 
mitting, then, that the impediment was unknown we 
must shut out from the question the relations of Henry 
with lady Elizabeth Boleyn, and with her daughter 
Mary, for they were not unknown nothing remains but 
to accept the fearful story told, not by Dr. Sander only, 
nor by him before all others, and say that, at least, by 
the confession of the king and both Houses of Parlia 
ment, Anne Boleyn was Henry s child. 

It has been pleaded, by way of objection to this 
dismal story, that it is disproved by the age of Anne 
Boleyn. But the plea rests on an assumption which has 
not been made good, and for which no evidence has been 
brought. It has been said that Anne Boleyn went to 
France in October 1514 as one of the attendants of the 


princess Mary, who was going thither to be married to 
the king of France. " If Mistress Anne Boleyn w^ent to 
France," says lord Herbert, 1 " with Mary the French 
queen, as is proved by divers principal authorities, both 
English and French, besides the MSS. I have seen, ... it 
must follow that she was born about or before 1498." 

But lord Herbert has not found many who accept his 
account, and it is not admitted that Anne Boleyn was 
the " M." Boleyn who went with queen Mary to France in 
1514. The common account is that Anne was born in 
1507, but for that account there is no other authority 
apparently Mr. Brewer knows of no other than the 
herald and antiquary Camden, who also seems to have 
had no authority for his assertion. As Henry VIII. was 
born A.D. 1491, he was seven years older than Anne 
according to lord Herbert, and sixteen according to 
Camden. Both accounts are equally trustworthy, for 
they seem to be nothing but guesses, and perhaps guesses 
made for the purpose of furnishing some grounds for dis 
puting the history of Anne as it was known to Dr. Sander. 

Anne Boleyn was dear to Protestants, and they have 
spoken kindly and well of her. She had chaplains who 
rose to high places Latimer, Shaxton, and Parker. 
Cranmer himself, her tutor and father s chaplain, was 
made archbishop at her request. 2 She was a woman 
notorious, if not famous, in Europe, and came to an un 
timely and miserable end. But notwithstanding, none 

1 Life of Henry VIII., p. 259. Dr. Cranmer who had been tutor 

2 See bk. i. chap. xiii. p. 87, to the marchioness Anne, and lately 
note 2. Dr. Sander is confirmed ambassador to the emperor arch- 
by the Venetian ambassador, see bishop of Canterbury, this having 
Venetian Calendar, Eawdon Brown, been done by favour of said mar- 
iv. 846. " His majesty has created chioness. 



of those who spoke of her, or who had received benefits 
from her, seem to have taken the trouble to tell us how 
old she was. All we seem to gather is that she was 
certainly young even when she perished on the scaffold. 
The glimpses we have of her in the Tower, from the 
letters of Sir William Kingston, betray levity perhaps, 
but still it is the levity of a very young woman. 

George Wyatt, defending her memory against Dr. 
Sander, refrains from telling her age, and is also silent 
about the story of her birth, and that silence is full of 
meaning. Foxe is equally silent ; and Strype, who had 
so many opportunities, and who had consulted so many 
records of those days, seems to have found no clue to her 
age ; and there is nothing known that can be opposed to 
the statement of Mr. Justice Eastall and Dr. Sander, 
which is certainly probable and consistent with itself. 

It is hardly credible that Anne Boleyn supposing her 
to have been born, as Camden says, in 1507 was one of 
the ladies in attendance on queen Mary of France in 
1514, and to have been the only one allowed to remain 
when the king dismissed the Englishwomen in attend 
ance on Mary. 

There seems to be no fact clearly ascertained in the 
history of Anne Boleyn inconsistent with the supposition 
that she was bom in 1 5 10, or even 1511. Mr. Brewer l 
finds her about the court in March 1522, "present at 
one of those revels at court in which Henry delighted." 
But she may have been a child, acting in some pageant 
during the carnival, for Ash Wednesday in that year fell 
on the 5th of March. 

1 Letters and Papers, &c., iv, Introduction, p. ccxxxiv, 


Anne, then, was at the court in 1522, and again when 
the son of the earl of Northumberland fell in love with 
her, and was not allowed to many her, because he was 
already betrothed to a daughter of the earl of Shrews 
bury. This affair with Henry Percy seems to have been 
serious, and Anne, according to Cavendish, hated the 
Cardinal because he meddled in the matter. 

At that time also she seems to disappear from the 
court, and we hear no more of her in England till 1527. 
Dr. Sander, following Eastall, says that at fifteen she 
misconducted herself at the time of her abandonment 
by Percy and was sent by her father to France. If 
she was born in 1510, or early in 1511 for Camden s 
assertion is not of more value than that of Dr. Sander 
she was then fifteen, and in 1527, when Henry resolved 
to divorce his wife for her sake, she was seventeen. 

She spent two years in France, from 1525 to 1527, 
and nothing is known of her at variance with this ac 
count of Dr. Sander. 

The divorce of Henry VIII. has been always regarded 
as the work of Cardinal Wolsey, but whether he him 
self, or the king s confessor, Longland bishop of Lincoln, 
by his advice, first broached the matter to the king, has 
been disputed. There has been no dispute about the 
Cardinal s desires and the bishop s service to bring it to 
pass. William Tyndale and the apostate Observant, 
William Koye, on the one hand, the queen herself and 
the emperor Charles V. on the other, agree in this, that 
the Cardinal of York was the well out of which the bitter 
waters of that great scandal issued forth. The Cardinal 


of York had been, as lie believed, deluded and overreached 
by the emperor Charles V., the nephew of the queen, and 
too many people knew it. He desired revenge, and as 
he could not punish the emperor in person, he resolved to 
make him suffer in the honour of his family. The vain 
glorious man had been hurt by the contempt of one whom 
he did not respect, and he was humbled in the presence 
of the queen, whose daily life was not like his. Bent 
upon revenge, he advised the king to put away his law 
ful wife. Hatred is a bad counsellor, and the Cardinal 
found out that he had given counsel against himself; 
the divorce was not to be had, and though the Cardinal 
desired it as much as the king himself, he could not 
bring it about. It is true he embittered the days of 
the queen, but he utterly ruined himself; 


The king, who, if he did not love his wife, most 
certainly held her in great respect, disliked at first the 
shameless advice of his minister, discerning its extreme 
unseemliness, if not its sinfulness, for he must have felt 
that at least there was something dishonourable in the 
wish to put away the mother of his child, and whom he 
had regarded as his wife for nearly twenty years. The 
tempter, however, had done his work, and the evil 
thought in the king s mind was never cast out again. 
The king consulted learned men, but with great secrecy, 
and began to read the writings of canonists and theo- 

o o 

logians on the doctrine of marriage. As he went on 
with his dismal studies he became aware that he cared 
less than he did for the queen, and that he should be 
glad to put some one else in her place. The more he 


read, the more clearly he saw that his marriage was not 
good; in the end he convinced himself that the Pope 
could never make it good, it being beyond his power to 
make lawful such a marriage as his. His agents in 
Rome were instructed, therefore, " if it be possible, to 
retain some notable and excellent divine, a friar, or other 
that may, can, or will firmly stick to our causes, in 
leaning to that quod Pontifex ex jure divino non potest 
dispensare." l 

But he saw also at the same time that the Pope only 
ould set that marriage aside, for though he had per 
suaded himself that it was not within the power of the 
Pope to make it lawful, he nevertheless believed that 
it could not be safely made void without the Pope s 

It is not known when he began to entertain doubts 
about his marriage ; but it is certain that he had made 
up his mind to desert the queen, and to sue for a divorce 
early in 1527, when Anne Boleyn reappeared at the 
court. 2 In May of that year Cardinal Wolsey, as Legate, 
held a court in his own house, and began a process ex 
officio against Henry, who was charged with the offence 
of living in the state of marriage with the widow of his 
brother deceased. It does not appear that the queen 
was aware of these doings, and the only defender of the 

1 Letter of Henry to Gardiner and about two years ago, when lie heard 
the others, April 6, 1529, in Burnet, that the king was advised hy his 
History of the Reformation, iv. p. confessor to abstain from intercourse 
117, ed. Pocock. with the queen, so as not to offend 

2 Letters and Papers, Brewer, iv. his conscience." On the 25th of 
p. in, 5774. Sir Thomas Boleyn July 1527 he had not broken off 
made a deposition as a witness for with her, as appears by a letter of 
the king in the suit for the divorce, Sampson to Cardinal Wolsey, in 
July 15, 1529, that the king treated Pocock, Records of the Reformation, 
the queen as his lawful wife "till i. u. 


marriage present in court was Henry VIIL, who longed 
to hear it pronounced a nullity. That process was 
abandoned : probably the Cardinal saw that he could not 
attain his ends without dishonour to himself and the 
king ; for the queen would have refused to be silent 
when deprived of her rank, and would have appealed at 
once, with the good wishes of all the world, under a 
wrong so treacherously done, to the sovereign judge, the 
Bishop of Borne. 

In the meantime news came of the sack of Eome by 
the Imperialists under the duke of Bourbon, and there 
arose at once throughout Europe a cry of indignation 
and of shame that a Catholic emperor should do the 
work of the heretics. Though the faith was dying, 
perhaps even dead, in the minds of men in power, yet 
the habits which the faith had formed could not be laid 
aside at once ; accordingly, out of reverence for the faith 
so shamelessly outraged, public prayers and supplica 
tions, with fasting, were had recourse to, bishops and 
kings agreeing together that at least the outward 
decencies must be respected. The people fasted, and 
made with the clergy solemn processions throughout the 
land, for as the shepherd was struck, they knew that the 
dispersion of the sheep must follow ; and so it did. 

The fast of three days having been ordered, the Cardinal 
and the king saw that they could make use of the public 
wrong done to the Pope. They would concert measures 
as publicly for his deliverance, and send a most solemn 
and pompous embassy to France an open profession of 
zeal and devotion ; but the embassy was a cloak for quite 
other designs. 


" Neither was it long," says Harpsfield, 1 "but that the Cardinal was 
sent ambassador to the said French king, and it was thought that the 
king was moved for the marriage of his sister, and that it had gone 
forward, saving that the most virtuous lady had a special respect and 
regard that she would not marry the king to the great discomfort and 
undoing of queen Katherine. When this practice of the divorce came 
to the knowledge of queen Katherine, little marvel was it if she took it 
grievously, even to the very heart ; considering after so long quiet and 
prosperous continuance, her great misery and calamity, immediately, if 
the divorce should take place, as indeed it did not many years after, 
which her infortunable and unlucky chance, it was thought the main 
and great tempest, wherewith she was tossed and tumbled by the 
ragious insurges of the wind and water, and often driven from the 
shore, before she could, at her first coming out of Spain, arrive, did 
many years before bode and portend. And as it hath been said, the 
queen herself by reason thereof mistrusted ever and feared some un 
lucky and unhappy chance impending upon her. 

" The queen remaining in this great dolour, sorrow, and lamentation, 
the king did comfort her, and willed her to bear all things patiently, 
saying that all that was attempted tended only to the searching and 
finding out of the truth. Then was there nothing so common and 
frequent, and so tossed in every man s mouth, in all talk and at all 
tables, as was this matter, both in taverns, alehouses, and barbers shops, 
yea, and in pulpits too : some well liking and allowing the divorce, some 
other most highly detesting the same. The king, that the matter 
might be more orderly and authentically heard, discussed, and deter 
mined, requested Pope Clement to send purposely some Cardinal into 
England with sufficient authority to end and decide the weighty 
matter, who sent Cardinal Laurent Campegius, that had been Legate in 
England ten years before, and did associate to him Cardinal Wolsey." 

The queen herself, whom the divorce especially 
touched, was kept in ignorance of the plot devised 
against her as long as possible, and then when it was no 
longer in the king s power to hide from her that he had 
taken measures to put her away and make her marriage 
a nullity, she was told not the truth, but something else 

1 Treatise of Marriage, bk. ii. p. 95, Eyston MS. 


namely, that the king had been troubled in his mind, 
and was bent, not on divorcing her, but on searching out 
the truth concerning the validity of their marriage, the 
legitimacy of their child, and the right of that child to 
her father s inheritance, out of his deep concern for the 
peace and well-doing of his subjects, and the quiet of 
his own conscience, which had been disturbed by the 
opinions of learned men. It was considered expedient 
at this time by the duke of Norfolk also and his friends 
that the Cardinal should be absent from the court, and 
the Cardinal was therefore sent ambassador to France. 

" Their intent and purpose was," says Cavendish, 1 
" only to get him out of the king s daily presence, and 
to convey him out of the realm, that they might have 
convenient leisure and opportunity to adventure their 
long-desired enterprise, and by the aid of their chief 
mistress, my lady Anne, to deprave him so unto the king 
in his absence that he should be rather in his high dis 
pleasure than in his accustomed favour, or at the least 
to be in less estimation with his majesty/ 

The Cardinal, with a large train, left London, July 3, 
1527, and in due time landed at Calais. He made three 
treaties with the king of France, by one of which the 
contracting parties agreed that no Bull or Brief of the 
Pope should be received in France or England during 
the captivity of the Pope. 2 " That during the said cap- 

1 Life of Cardinal Wolsey, p. 148, at Calais, and was to meet the most 
ed. Singer. Christian king at Amiens. The im- 

2 " It is reported that the Cardinal perial councillors of Valladolid say 
of York," says Andrea Navagero, the in secret that the Cardinal intends 
Venetian ambassador in Spain, writ- to separate the Church of Eng- 
ing from Valladolid, July 27, 1527 land and of France from that of 
(Bawdon Brown, Venetian Calendar B.ome, making himself the head of 
of State Papers, iv. 142), " has arrived it, saying that as the Pope is not at 


tivity of the Pope, whatsoever by the Cardinal of York, 
assisted by the prelates of England assembled and called 
together by the authority of the said king, should be 
determined concerning the administration of ecclesiastical 
-affairs, in the said kingdom of England and other coun 
tries, being in the dominion of the said Henry, should 
the consent of the said king being first had be decreed 
and observed." 1 

Francis I. also took the like power to himself within 
his dominions, but it may be doubted whether he was 
quite as earnest in the matter as the Cardinal was, seeing 
that the latter proposed to ask the Pope to make him, 
Cardinal Wolsey, his vicar-general so long as the cap 
tivity lasted. 

On this attempted usurpation of the Papal jurisdic 
tion, and its subjugation at the same time to the civil 
power, the consent of which was required for its valid 
exercise, lord Herbert observes, " Here certainly began 
the taste that our king took of governing in chief the 
clergy, of which, therefore, as well as the dissolution of 
monasteries, it seems the first arguments and impres 
sions were derived from the Cardinal." 2 

Cardinal Wolsey having persuaded four other car 
dinals to enter into his plan, wrote a letter from Com- 
piegne, September 16, 1527^ which they signed with 
him, to the Pope, in which he asked him to intrust his 

liberty, he is not to be obeyed in ported with a view to alienate the 

any way ; and that even were the Pope from the two kings." 

emperor to release him, he could not 1 Lord Herbert, Life of Henry 

be considered free, unless all his VIII., p. 209 ; Eymer, Fcedera, vi. 

fortresses and the whole of his terri- pt. ii. p. 85. 

tory, now in the emperor s hands, 2 Ibid., ut supra. 

were restored to him, I cannot 3 Le Grand, Hist, du Divorce, iii. 

affirm whether this be true or re- p. 4. 


whole authority into the keeping of him, Cardinal 
Wolsey. The Bull was also written ready for the seal 
of the Pope, in which the Cardinal proposed to take all 
the Papal power " omnem potestatis et ordinaries et ex- 
traordinarice plenitudinem " so that he might, as he 
said, be able to dispense even with the divine law, and 
do that which the Holy See had not been in the habit 
of doing ; moreover, the Pope was also to promise never 
to undo the acts of the Cardinal, or cancel his powers so 
long as he remained a prisoner. 1 

"While the Cardinal was asking for these powers from 
the Pope in prison, he and Francis I. were leagued 
together to respect no decrees which the Pope might 
make during his imprisonment. 

It has been said that the Pope did grant the powers 
asked for ; so says lord Herbert, on the authority of 
Hall. Strype, 2 too, who might have known better, 
after enumerating his titles, writes that the Cardinal 
" received one more from Pope Clement this year, that 
of vicar-general, whereby he was empowered to perform 
all that the Pope might have done himself." 

This commission to be the vicar of the Pope serves but 
one purpose now ; it unveils the deep-rooted immorality 
of the Cardinal of York, his contempt of justice, and his 
want of reverence for holy things. He has himself 
revealed the meanness of his mind, for he told the king 
that his reason for desiring to obtain the Papal powers 

1 Pocock, Kecords, i. p. 19. " Ad strictione etiamsi ad divinse legis 

exercendum, exequendnm et expe- relaxationem limitacionem casus per- 

diendum omnia ea et singula qnae tineat, fueritque ejusmodi in quo 

nos de potestale vel ordinaria vel Sedes Apostolica non consueverat 

absoluta in remittandis, relaxandis, dispensare." 

limitandis ant derogandis canonibns 2 Ecclesiastical Memorials, i. p. 

facere possemus absque aliqna re- 107, ed. of 1822. 


was that he might delegate judges to determine the 
question which the king had raised concerning his mar 
riage, and on the queen s appeal, to take cognisance of 
the cause himself, and to decide it, without any appeal 
to the Pope from his sentence. 1 

But the Cardinal, before he left France, and before 
the Pope could even see the Bull which he had so care 
fully drawn up, took upon himself to execute the office 
which he intended to assume. 

"In the morning that my lord," says Cavendish, 2 
" should depart and remove, being then at Mass in his 
closet, he consecrated the chancellor of France a Car 
dinal, and put upon him the habit due to that order, 
and then took his journey into England ward." 

Cavendish was more learned in the ceremonial of the 
Cardinal s household than in the Eubrics of the Pontifi 
cate. That which Cavendish did not clearly understand, 
and which Fiddes 8 also describes in the same words, 
is explained in a Life of Cardinal Wolsey in the Vati 
can, a copy of which may be seen among the transcripts 
in the British Museum, and which Mr. Pocock 4 has 
published among his " Eecords of the Keformation." 
Clement VII. had promised, on the petition of king 
Francis, to make the chancellor of France a Cardinal, 
but he had hitherto, for certain reasons, put off the 
formal promotion. Wolsey, in his vanity, trampling on 
decency as well as law, undertook to do that which the 

1 Letters and Papers, Brewer, iv. proceribus Gallise, quam Clemens, 
pt. ii. 3400. petente rege, Cardinalem designa- 

2 Life of Wolsey, p. 185, ed. veratquidem,sedtempusremintiandi 
Singer. eum disluteral, assumere honoris 

3 Life of Wolsey, p. 404. ejus insignia, seqiie per Cardinal! 

4 Kecords, ii. p. 88. " Unum e habere jussit. ;; 


Pope himself had not yet done. He ordered the chan 
cellor to put on the dress of a Cardinal, and to assume 
the dignity promised but not conferred. There was no 

The Cardinal of York was a great man in England, 
but the selfishness to which he was a slave had killed in 
him all respect for those whom he thought he could 
overreach or master. He was insolent to the Pope, and 
contemptuous of the Cardinals, his brethren. In the year 
i529,within a few months of his miserable undoing, he 
threatened to become a schismatic bishop if the Cardinals 
should insist on the payment of the ordinary fees due 
on his translation from Durham to Winchester. 

If the Cardinals for that is the meaning of his letter 
to Gregorio Casali and Peter Vannes, who in Eome 
solicited his Bulls " will not grant the Bulls for 5000 
or 6000 ducats, they have little regard to his merits, 
or to the profit which will accrue to them by his accept 
ance of Winchester. Has already the profits of the 
see by the king s grant~" and can hold them with 
Durham ivithout any Bulls. If it were not for the 
evil example, would not give a thousand ducats for the 
Bulls." 1 

The man was a cardinal as well as an archbishop, yet 
he so little regarded the sacred relations in which he 
stood to the Pope as to say that he could hold a bishopric 
without the sanction of the sovereign Pontiff. 

It is not improbable that he may have suspected that 
his absence from England in the year 1527 might be an 
occasion of mischief. He protected himself, therefore, 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, iv. pt. iii. 5313. 


against the queen, whom he had least reason to fear; 
for a priest whom he had employed as his commissary 
in Tournai, and whom he had made dean of the chapel 
royal, was, it seems, directed to watch the behaviour of 
the queen. This man, Dr. Eichard Sampson, wrote to 
him, July 25, as follows : l - 

" The great matter is in very good train ; good coun 
tenance, much better than was in mine opinion : less 
suspicion or little : the merry visage is returned not less 
than was wont. The other party, as your grace knoweth, 
lacketh no wit, and so showeth highly in this matter. If 
that I perceive otherwise or more, I shall not fail to ad 
vertise your grace with diligence." 

On the 2 gtli of July the Cardinal himself sends a 
letter to the king, in which he tells him that he, the 
Cardinal, was " daily and hourly musing and thinking" 
on the " great and secret affair " of the king, and " how 
the same may come to good effect and desired end." 
In other words, how to accomplish the divorce and 
break a lawful marriage. 

" Secret affair," or " the king s matter," was the 
accepted phrase which men now used in speaking of the 
divorce, and the words no doubt helped very much to 
deaden their conscience, because they were in themselves 
innocent, though the real meaning was evil. It was, 
no doubt, a "secret affair;" but it was not at this time 
a secret to the queen, who had been able, notwithstand 
ing all the efforts of the Cardinal and the king, to send 
an account to her nephew, the emperor, of the mischief 
that was done, and of the greater mischief to come. 

1 Pocock, Records, i. p. 1 1. 

2 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, iv. pt. ii. 3311. 


The Cardinal Archbishop of York, " daily and hourly 
musing" how to bring the "secret affair" to "good 
effect and desired end," wrote on the ist of August to the 
king s ambassadors with the emperor, namely, the bishop 
of Worcester, and Edward Lee, the Cardinal s successor 
in York, and instructed them to tell the emperor that 
there was no intention whatever to disturb the marriage, 
but rather to confirm it, against any doubts that might 
be made about it. 1 The bishop and the priest were to 
say that to the emperor, who already knew all that had 
been done, and that the Cardinal had been the cause of 
that " scandalous proceeding." 

It cannot be said in favour of the Cardinal that he 
yielded to the king only so far as was necessary for the 
discovery of the truth concerning his marriage. He 
knew the marriage was a lawful and perfectly valid 
marriage, and he also knew that the king under his 
teaching had made up his mind to break it. He was 
not shocked at this profanation of a sacrament, and he did 
his utmost to help the king. He knew, too, that others 
would think ill of him for his servility, and he there 
fore strove to the end to hide as much as he could the 
real purpose of the king. It was part of his service to 
be rendered in France to tell the French king that 
Henry VIII. was dissatisfied with his wife, and wished 
to be rid of her. " Nothing now remains," he writes to 
the king, August 16, "except to disclose your private 
matter, which I propose to do in so cloudy and dark a 
sort that he shall not know your utter determination." 2 

He was not so reserved in his dealings with the king 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Erewer, ut supra, 3327. 2 Ibid., 3350. 


of England, and he does not pretend to be ignorant of 
the king s purpose. When Henry had made up his 
mind to send some one to the Pope, and had chosen Dr. 
William Knight, secretary of state, and had informed 
the Cardinal of his resolve, the Cardinal, not thinking 
that Dr. Knight was a man fit for the purpose, but sub 
mitting to the king s choice, gave him such instructions 
as were suited to the evil intended " with less disclosing 
of the matter." 1 In the beginning of this affair of the 
divorce, the Cardinal hoped to attain his end by fraud, 
and to obtain from the Pope the implicit dissolution of 
the king s marriage without the Pope s knowledge of the 
meaning of his acts. 

The secretary of state whom the king sent to the 
Pope was Dr. William Knight, at this time a prebendary 
of St. Paul s, of Bangor, and of Lincoln, as well as arch 
deacon of Huntingdon and of Chester. He became also, 
two years later, archdeacon of the East Riding of York, 
on the probably enforced resignation of Thomas Winter, 
the son of the Cardinal, then in disgrace, and near his 
most wretched end. Dr. Knight served the king faith 
fully, and never shrunk from any baseness ; he received 
his reward in due time, and was made bishop of Bath 
and Wells, but in schism, and without the leave of the 
Pope a heretic and a schismatic. 

Dr. Knight left London instructed by the king to ask 
the Pope for a dispensation to have two wives at once, 
but the archdeacon does not hide from the king that in his 
opinion such a dispensation might be difficult to obtain. 2 
Later instructions from the Cardinal reached the arck- 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, ut supra. 3423. 2 Ibid., 3432. 


deacon before he was admitted into the presence of the 
sovereign Pontiff. These instructions had been brought 
to him by the chaplain of Sir Thomas Boleyn, believed 
to be no other than Thomas Cranmer. The new instruc 
tions seem to have been less openly shameless, for it does 
not appear that the archdeacon prayed the Pope to sanc 
tion polygamy. The suggestion, then, that the king 
might have two wives living at the same time, did not 
come from the Pope, as some have said, but from Henry 
himself, and the men without honour and without faith 
in whom he had placed his confidence to his irreparable 

According to the archdeacon s account, there was- 
nothing illegal in his petition to the Pope, however 
suspicious it might seem. 

"We desired His Holiness" these are his words 
" to commit the knowledge of the dispensation that was 
obtained in time of Juli, of famous memory, for matri 
mony to be had between the king and the widow, relict 
late of prince Arthur ; and that he might have it in 
form as that was that your grace [the Cardinal] sent 
hither." 1 

There is something evil-sounding in a petition pre 
sented by a man to examine into the lawfulness of a 
contract into which he had entered, and by which he had 
profited ; nor is it to his credit that he should attempt 
to direct that examination according to his own opinion. 
The king professed to have doubts about his marriage, 
and said that his conscience was ill at ease, because he 
was not living in lawful wedlock. Hence the necessity > 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. 34, ed. Pocock. 


lie said, of ascertaining whether the dispensation granted 
by Julius II. was a sufficient justification. He did not 
now maintain that the marriage might not be made law 
ful, or that the Pope could not grant the dispensation : 
he wished to be sure that the dispensation already 
granted by the Pope was without flaw ; that was all. 

On the surface nothing could be more fair, nothing 
more worthy of an honest man, than to be secured 
against the disherison of his children and the dishonour 
of his wife. Henry VIII. was not careful only of his 
wife and child, but he was also afraid of offending God, 
and accordingly, as a good and pious Catholic, he went 
to the Pope for the solution of his doubts and the peace 
of his conscience, grievously disturbed. 

As Henry and Catherine could not have been lawfully 
married without the permission of the Pope, so Julius 
II. had permitted their marriage. But now, after eigh 
teen years of marriage, the Pope, Clement VII. , is asked 
to examine and determine whether the dispensation of 
his predecessor was valid. A scruple so strange and so 
late in coming might be honest, but it might be also 
not honest. 

His Holiness assented to the prayer of the king so far 
as it related to the searching out the validity of the dis 
pensation, but he refused to accept the conditions which 
the king wished to lay those under who were to make 
that examination. He would not, without consulting 
the Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor, issue the commission 
which the archdeacon desired to have in the form in 
which the archdeacon presented it. 

The archdeacon was not alone in this embassy ; 



Gregorio Casali was with him, a skilful Italian, and 
apparently a much abler man than the archdeacon of 
Chester. They no doubt saw that the Pope had some 
suspicions of their master, and that he would not enter 
blindly into their toils. So they began to weave the 
web of iniquity elsewhere. This is the account which 
the archdeacon gives of their second attempt : 

"We, perceiving that the obtaining of our charges, 
after the king s and your grace s pleasure, depended 
much upon the advice of Sanctorum Quatuor, did pre 
vent his going unto the Pope, and delivering your 
grace s letters with recommendations accordingly, we 
desired him to be good and favourable unto our requests 
in the king s behalf; and for the better obtaining of 
our desires, we promised to see unto him with a compe 
tent reward." 1 

This was said to Lorenzo Pucci, Cardinal Bishop of 
Palestrina. They then showed him the commission, 
which had been drawn up in England ; but the Cardinal, 
though promised a " competent reward," told the arch 
deacon and his companion at once that the commission 
" could not pass without perpetual dishonour unto 
the Pope, the king, and your grace," i.e., Cardinal 
Wolsey, by whom that very commission had been de 

The commission had been contrived in a spirit of 
fraud, and in the expectation that the Pope would not 
discover the snare laid for him. " When the purport of 
that commission is well studied," so says the Cardinal 
"himself to the king, " it will be found that nothing can 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. 35, ed. Pocock. 


be better suited to your purpose ivith less disclosing of 
the matter." 1 

Cardinal Pucci saw perhaps no fraud, for lie saw too 
clearly all that was meant, and he may have regarded 
the commission so drawn up, and which he pronounced 
dishonourable, as the blundering of unscrupulous men 
without honour or shame. There was no help for it 
now, the king s agents must leave the commission with 
the Cardinal, and accept his corrections. 

The Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor drew up a commis 
sion in due form, and Mr. Secretary Knight sent it 
home, hoping that it would answer the purpose of his 
master ; and that done, he believed that he had done all 
that was desirable to be done. 

The commission being obtained, " though not in the 
form that was conceived in England/ the two agents, 
" Mr. Gregory and I," says Dr. Knight in his letter to 
the king, "have rewarded with two thousand crowns" 
the Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor, " of such money as 
your highness hath caused to be made unto Venice for 
the furtherance of your causes." The same person wrote 
also on the same day to Cardinal Wolsey in these words : 
"We have given unto my lord Cardinal Sanctorum 
Quatuor two thousand crowns, and unto the secretary 
thirty crowns." : The thirty crowns paid to the secre 
tary were probably fees of that officer, but perhaps 
liberally discharged, and with an evil purpose. 

Dr. Knight was an archdeacon, and therefore an 
ecclesiastical judge ; on the road to a bishopric, and in 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, 2 Burnet, Hist. Eeform., iv. pp. 
iv. pt. ii. n. 3423. 36, 39, ed. Pocock. 


fact tie travelled on it and obtained his reward, but 
out of the grace of God. He had no scruples about 
bribery, and did his utmost to corrupt a Cardinal of 
Holy Church. It is true he had been instructed to 
do so, and money had been provided for the very pur 
pose of buying justice provided, moreover, by a Car 
dinal, who to please the king, whom he professed to 
serve, shrank not, having dishonoured himself, from 
dishonouring his brethren the Cardinals of the Eoman 

The archdeacon announces the corruption of Cardinal 
Pucci to the king and to the Cardinal of York, without 
any misgiving that either of them would be otherwise 
than glad over the fate of the Cardinal ; and no doubt 
they were glad, but with the gladness of Annas and 
Caiphas when they were told that Judas had accepted 
the thirty pieces of silver. 

He proclaimed the dishonour of the Cardinal on 
the ist day of January 1528 ; but three months later, 
Gardiner and Fox and Gregorio Casali, the king s 
agents in this disreputable affair, in their letter to the 
Cardinal of York, made their confession in these terms : 
" It should be displeasant to his grace to understand 
that the said Cardinal hath refused to take the two 
thousand crowns offered by Mr. Secretary [the arch 
deacon] and Mr. Gregory [Casali], which his highness 
thought verily he had accepted and taken/ 1 

Dr. Gilbert Burnet published these letters of the 
archdeacon of Chester, and might have read them; 
nevertheless, he thus expresses himself: " The Cardinal 

1 Pocock, Records, i. p. 102. 


Sanctorum Quatuor got four thousand crowns as the 
reward of his pains, and in earnest of what he was to 
expect when the matter should be brought to a final 
conclusion." 1 

It is not so easy to excuse Burnet s rejoicing over the 
fall of a Cardinal ; for he knew, or might have known, 
that the Cardinal had not accepted any money whatever, 
seeing that he has printed a letter of Cardinal Wolsey 
also in which the confession is made, perhaps not with 
out regret, that the hands of Cardinal Pucci refused to 
touch the wages of sin. 2 

The archdeacon asked the Pope for a commission to 
try the validity of a certain dispensation ; the Pope 
granted it, though not in the form in which the arch 
deacon had been instructed to obtain it. He also asked 
for a dispensation to enable the king to marry within 
the forbidden degrees of kindred and affinity. That too 
was granted. Both the dispensation and the commission 
were sent at once to England by the prothonotary 
Gambara, but as they were not according to the form in 
which they had been fashioned there, they were therefore 
insufficient for the king s purpose. Mr. Pocock has 
published a letter, drawn up by Peter Vannes, secretary 
of the Cardinal of York, before he entered the king s 
service, to be sent by the king to the Cardinal Pucci, in 
which this acknowledgment is made, and in which the 
Cardinal is entreated to be more indulgent to the king. 3 

1 Hist. Reform., i. 94, ed. Pocock. natione plurimum juvante pro 

2 Ibid., iv. 47, ed. Pocock. " Et causa nostra nobis benignissime con- 
quamvis munusculum illud olim cessit, easque etsi, ubi mature pru- 
oblatum recusaverit." dentique consilio adhibito, omni ex 

3 Records, i. p. 60. " Accepimus parte perpendissemus, invenerimus 
deinde commissionem et dispensa- pro nostro recte conficiendo negotio, 
tionem quees sanctissimus dominus nullius esse roboris validitatis et 
noster vestra reverendissima domi- effectus." 


The dispensation for the future marriage of the king 
is couched in the most ample form, for he has leave to 
marry any one related to him in the second degree of 
kindred, and in the first degree of affinity, whether law 
fully or unlawfully entered into. Moreover, he is not 
allowed to marry his brother s widow ; and that is the 
marriage which he wished to make void. 

Nevertheless, the dispensation was not regarded as 
sufficient, and the reason seems to be this. Dr. Knight 
was commissioned to sue out a dispensation to enable 
the king to have a wife constante matrimonio in other 
words, to commit polygamy. Polygamy not being sanc 
tioned, the dispensation was treated as worthless. 

Mr. Pocock has printed this dispensation, and with it 
certain notes made in the margin of the same, one of 
which states directly that the dispensation, being con 
ditional on the dissolution of the subsisting marriage, 
was not to the purpose. In the opinion of him who 
wrote that note the dispensation should have been un 
conditional, and without any relation to the dissolution 
of the marriage of Henry and Catherine. 1 

Certainly this seems to show that Henry VIII. and 
Cardinal Wolsey, while asking for a commission to ex 
amine into the lawfulness of the dispensation by which 
the marriage of the king had been sanctioned, were asking 
for another dispensation of the like nature to be granted 
at the same time. Now, if the Cardinal Sanctorum 
Quatuor had granted the commission, and then the dis 
pensation, without any mention of the controversy about 

1 Pocock, Eecords, i. p. 23. " Hoc utam esse, et cum decisione ac di*- 
petere nihil pertinet ad prseseiitein solutione prsesentis matrimonii 11011 
dispensationem quam convenit absol- conjungi." 


the first marriage, is it quite certain that Henry would 
have waited for the divorce before he took advantage of 
the dispensation, if it had been drawn up in the terms 
proposed by him through the archdeacon of Chester ? 
The archdeacon himself seems to have discovered the 
trick, if trick there was, or perhaps it had been explained 
to him, for he confessed that he did not think he should 
obtain the dispensation in the form in which he had 
been instructed to ask for it. 

It may be that there was no plan laid for deceiving 
the Pope, but the facts, and the admission of the arch 
deacon, are more easily interpreted in a bad sense. 

If the dispensation had been granted as it was asked 
for, namely, without conditions and without mention of 
Henry s marriage with Catherine, it would have been 
very easy to say, when the king married Anne Boleyn, 
that he did so with the implicit sanction of the Holy See. 
It would have been said that the Pope knew of the first 
marriage, and of Henry s denial of its lawfulness, and yet 
had granted him a dispensation to marry ; that he must 
have regarded the first marriage as a nullity, and the dis 
pensation therefore an implicit declaration of that nullity. 

The first embassy ended in failure. In the beginning 
of the next year, 1528, it was resolved to send abler men 
to the Pope ; accordingly the choice of the king and the 
Cardinal fell upon Edward Fox, the king s chaplain, 
afterwards, in schism, bishop of Hereford, and Dr. Stephen 
Gardiner, trained in the household of Wolsey. A fitter 
instrument could not be found than this latter ecclesiastic, 
a man greedy of power, insolent and overbearing, whose 
conscience seems to have been wholly under the dominion 
of his will. 


Cardinal Wolsey, in commending Gardiner to the 
Pope, spoke of him as a man who was in all his secrets, 
and as his other half, and then protested, on his life 
and sou], that he, the Cardinal, would undergo any 
torments rather than further any wishes of the king 
which he did not know to be right, lawful, and just. 1 
Now, the Cardinal knew, for he confessed it in his let 
ters 2 to Gregory and John de Casali, that the wish of 
the king was to put away his wife. 

In this embassy the first place had been given to Fox, 
who had been for some time in the service of the king, 
and the second place was given to Gardiner, who hitherto 
had been in the service of the Cardinal. But before 
they left England, the order of precedence was changed. 
Gardiner, who was the last, made himself first, and 
Fox accepted his position, probably unable to withstand 
the more resolute will and more ambitious temper of Dr. 
Stephen Gardiner. This is the account they both give 
of this their arrangement. They wrote a joint letter 
from Dover to the Cardinal, February 13, 1528, and 
thus explain the matter : 3 

"And where your grace, among such articles as we 
required answers unto, maketh mention that because 
I, Edward Fox, am the king s servant and counsellor, 
and first named in the letters of his grace s own hand, 
if it were so thought convenient between us, should have 

1 Burnet, Hist. Keform., iv. p. 45, 2 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. pp. 

ed. Pocock. "Hujus regis precibus 19, 53, ed. Pocock. The first written 

. . . quas nisi rectas sanctas ac justas in December 1527, the second in 

esse scirem, omne prius supplicii February 1528. 

genus ultro subirem quam eas prom- 3 Pocock, Records of the Refor- 

overem, pro hisque ego vitam meam mation, i. p. 74. 
et animam spoiideo." 


the former place, and I, Steven Gardyner, to have the 
speech and utterance as hereunto, albeit we both joined 
in this message as to be in all doings of one mind, will, 
and intent, endeavouring ourselves ever to that may be 
to the furtherance of the king s mind and purpose ; by 
reason whereof, without distinction of superiority, to that 
-effect and purpose, we have been always, and be of such 
conformity, as we shall take in good part whatsoever 
shall be the king s and your grace s pleasure in that be 
half ; yet that matter referred to our discretion, foras 
much as in this journey and message we be both the 
king s servants, having equal charge and burden in this 
matter, we are between us agreed, resolved, and deter 
mined, that the pre-eminence both of place, speech, and 
utterance be always given to me, Steven Gardyner, with 
out altercation or variance, as our old amity and fast 
friendship doth require." 

Bonner, who knew him well, writing to Cromwell, to 
whom he, Bonner, owed his promotions in the Church, 
calls the attention of his patron to the overbearing tern- 
per of the bishop. 

" I mislike in the bishop of Winchester," says Bonner, 
"that when any man is sent in the king s affairs, and by 
his highness commandment, the bishop, unless he be 
the only and chief inventor of the matter, and setter- 
forth of the person, he will not only use many cavilla- 
tions, but also use great strangeness in countenance and 
cheer to the person that is sent." 

Perhaps Dr. Gardiner meant to give the Cardinal a 
hint at the same time that he was no longer his servant, 

1 Foxe, Acts and Monuments, v. p. 154, ed. Cattley. 


but one of "the king s servants," as he afterwards was, 
and, as the king s servant, unable, if not unwilling, to 
help his old master in his sore distress and utmost need. 

Having informed the Cardinal of the order of prece 
dence which they had established, the two priests went 
on their way to do their utmost to break a lawful mar 
riage, and to minister to the passions of the king. They 
arrived at Orvieto on the night of Friday, March 20, 
1528, and " came to the Pope s presence "-so they wrote 
on the 3ist of March the twenty-second day (mid-Lent 
Sunday), " and so daily from that time to the depeching 
of this post, were with His Holiness every day, three or 
four hours, consulting and debating." l 

In their first audience the Pope told them that in the 
matter which they had to treat " he would give such 
resolution without tract or delay as" they "could rea 
sonably desire, and as might be agreeable with law and 
equity, for justification of his doing and maintenance 
of his and the king s honour hereafter." 2 

And throughout this most painful business, notwith 
standing the importunities of the king and the pressure 
which his agents put on the Pope, who was then, in the 
eyes of men, perfectly defenceless, Clement VII. , in the 
midst of his sore anxieties, spoke no other language : 
he would do justice according to the law. 

Henry VIII. had written a book 3 in his own defence, 
and this book, sent to Orvieto with the ambassadors, 

1 Letter of Gardiner and Fox, Boleyn, Let. 16, Crapelet, Paris): " I 
March 31 ; Pocock s Records, i. 92. am ryght wel comfortyd in so muche 

2 Ibid., p. 95. that my boke makyth substantially 

3 The king in a letter to Anne for mi matter : in lokyng wheroff 
Boleyn thus speaks of his book I have spente above four ours this 
(Lettres de Henri VIII. a Anne day." 


was presented to the Pope by Gardiner and Fox on 
Tuesday, March 24, and this is their account of the 
matter in their letter to the Cardinal i 1 - 

" The next day at afternoon we went, as was ap 

pointed, to the Pope s Holiness, and exhibited unto him 

the king s book ; which His Holiness incontinently be 

gan to read; and standing awhile, and after sitting 

upon a form covered with a piece of an old coverlet not 

worth twenty pence, holding the book, read over the 

epistle before, and the latter part of the book touching 

the law, without suffering any of us to help him therein. 

Noting evermore the reasons as one succeeded another, 

and objecting that which His Holiness saw afterward 

answered. Which done, His Holiness greatly commended 

the book, and said he would for a day keep it with him, 

to the intent he might by himself at good leisure read, 

as well the first part, as also the second part again. And 

forasmuch as the epistle was directed to your grace and 

the other prelates, His Holiness demanded for the 

answer made thereunto, as the king s highness requireth 

in the end of his epistle. We said that none answer 

was made in writing, but of what sort the answer was 

His Holiness might perceive by your grace s letters, and 

such words as we had spoken unto him on your grace s 

behalf. And so seeming to be right well content there 

with, His Holiness demanded whether the king s high 

ness had at any time broken this matter to the queen 

or not. We said yea, and that she showed herself 

content to stand to the judgment of the Church." ! 

The Pope then told the two ambassadors that, as 

1 Pocock, Kecords, i. pp. 100, 101. 2 I^id. 


matters stood, Cardinal Wolsey could not be one of the 
judges, seeing that he was not indifferent in the matter, 
having already declared his mind, and thereby in a 
manner given sentence beforehand. 

To this Gardiner replied that the Cardinal had given 
his opinion on one part of the question only, not on the 
whole question. He had said that the law was in favour 
of the king if the facts were as the king alleged, but he 
had never said that the facts on which the king relied 
were true ; he was therefore an " indifferent " person, 
and might be left to examine and decide the question so 
far as the facts were concerned. 

The Pope, seeing the meaning of Gardiner, pursued 
this matter no further, and was silent ; and Gardiner 
says, " herewith His Holiness seemed satisfied. 7 

The commission, as before, under which judges were 
to try the validity of the dispensation by which the 
marriage of Henry and Catherine had been sanctioned, 
was drawn up in England ready for the Pope s assent, 
and was now in Gardiner s hands, but "it was then too 
late to read it. And His Holiness, willing us to leave 
it there with him, said he would in the morning read it 
by himself, and afterward send it to the Cardinal Sanc 
torum Quatuor" the bishop of Palestrina, whom Dr. 
Knight, archdeacon of Chester, reported as having ac 
cepted a bribe of two thousand crowns, and which Dr. 
Burnet magnified into four thousand. 

The king s agents, dismissed by the Pope, went at 
once, as Casali had gone before with the archdeacon, to 
see the Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor, in order to pre- 

1 Pocock, Kecords, i. p. 101. 


pare him, and if possible to win him over to adopt the 
king s opinion. 

The Cardinal received them courteously, and listened 
to their communications patiently, without directly con 
tradicting anything they said, but without showing that 
he agreed with them. He contrived to break the force 
of Gardiner s attack by diverting the discussion to a 
question of form. He, the Cardinal, stood for the 
ordinary forms of the court; Gardiner preferred an 
older and disused form ; and so far the Cardinal had the 
advantage. The next day, March 25, the ambassadors 
went to the Pope, but the Pope declined to speak or 
allow them to discuss the matter in his presence, because 
Cardinal Pucci, who was then ill, had not given his 

At three o clock the next day, March 26, the three 
agents of the king, on their admission to the Pope s 
chamber, found there with His Holiness the Cardinal 
Pucci and three other Cardinals. When they had all 
sat down, by direction of the Pope, the Dean of the 
Eota, Simoneta, was sent for " a man of good gravity," 
says Gardiner, "and, as it seemeth, substantial learned." 
Dr. Stephen Gardiner found no good reason for chang 
ing that opinion. 

The Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor Coronatorum 
proved to be a stronger man than Dr. Gardiner, and now 
the question before the Pope was, not the substance of 
the commission, but the form in which it should issue. 
Accordingly this was now debated, and when Cardinal 
Pucci and the Dean of the Eota had spoken, the Pope 
bade Dr. Gardiner answer them. "And so I did," says 


Gardiner, " to their good satisfaction ; " 1 but the Cardi 
nals may have had a different opinion. 

It seems that for the present the Cardinals said no 
more, and Dr. Gardiner considered, because they were 
silent, that he was to have the commission drawn up in 
the form he proposed, but which was a. form not then in 
use. And further, according to Gardiner s account, the 
Pope himself consented to adopt the old form, " and only 
rested to know the opinion of learned men whether the 
particular causes expressed in the commission may be 
justified to be sufficient for a divorce or not. And 
therefore willed the said Symonet to look his book, and 
to have conference with us." 2 But for all this, Gardi 
ner is forced to say that, after " conference " with the 
Dean of the Eota, he had only " good hope that we 
shall somewhat remove the Pope s Holiness from the 
respect of the style." 

Thus, then, on the 26th of March, after much dispu 
tation, Gardiner was not one step nearer his end. He had 
but "good hope," and he would not have had that consola 
tion had he not been so overbearing and self-confident. 

The next day was the day of the conference with the 
Dean of the Eota. " All this day," writes Dr. Gardiner, 
"from seven of the clock in the morning to dinner-time, 
and after dinner till it was night, the said Simonet, 
Dean of the Eote, hath been with us." But nothing 
was done, and the Dean of the Eota took his leave of 
them, having refused to yield in the slightest degree, 
notwithstanding their importunity ; he would not change 
the ordinary processes of the court. 

1 Pocock, ut supra, p. 106. 2 Ibid. 


" On the morrow," says Gardiner, which, was Satur 
day, March 28, "we went to the Cardinal de Monte," 
who was also most courteous, and praised Henry VIII. , 
" much extolling the king s merits and your grace s to 
wards the See Apostolic and them. . . . Finally he said 
what he might do in furthering the king s matter, which 
we showed unto him at length, it was his duty to do it, 
as a member of the See Apostolic." But he did not say 
what that was which he " might do." Gardiner was too 
sanguine, the Cardinal had promised nothing. 

The next day was Passion Sunday, and the Pope 
having, after dinner, heard the opinions of the Cardinals 
Pucci and del Monte, and of the Dean of the Eota, 
admitted the king s agents into his presence, and " willed 
me, Stephen Gardiner, to ask what we desired." Gar 
diner spoke, and said in substance that he desired a 
commission to dissolve the marriage of Henry and 
Catherine. It was useless now to attempt to hide the 
real purport of their embassy to the Pope, as the arch 
deacon of Chester had been instructed to do. The arch 
deacon had asked for a commission to try the validity 
of the dispensation granted by Pope Julius II. As that 
commission was never executed, and was pronounced by 
Henry to be of no use to him, it became then impossible 
to hide, even under the processes of the law, the real 
nature of the king s demands. Gardiner now threatened 
to settle the matter in England without respect to the 
Pope, 1 and his insolence seems to have surprised even 
the Cardinals, who had already had some experience of 
him. " When I had thus spoken, with many more 

1 The words he confesses to have uttered may be seen in note i, bk. i. 
chap. vii. p. 39, below. 


words sounding to that purpose, every man looked on 
other, and so stayed." Well they might, for here was a 
priest in the presence of the Pope asking favours, and at 
the same time breaking out into unseemly threats against 
the jurisdiction, the powers of which he pretended to 
respect, and of which he professed to have need. 

Cardinals Pucci and del Monte asked him " to be con 
tent with a commission containing no special causes, 
with promise of confirmation, which should serve the 
king s purpose. And therein should be no difficulty 

The offer thus made by the Cardinals was not accepted 
by Gardiner, because his instructions required him to 
obtain from the Pope, not a commission to try the vali 
dity of the marriage, but a commission to dissolve it. 
Moreover, he was to obtain that dissolution from the 
Pope himself, not through the hands of Legates or other 
judges, from whose sentence, if adverse to her, the queen 
was certain to appeal. In that state of things the pro 
mise of confirmation could not be legally performed. 

Gardiner in his letter assumes that the Pope and 
the Cardinals were ready to dissolve the marriage, and 
that they were restrained from doing so, not by any 
sense of justice, but by their dread of the emperor. He 
twisted a promise of confirmation of the sentence to be 
passed in England into "a plain confession," as he says, 
"that our cause was good, or else it ought not to be 
confirmed. Wherefore between our desire and their 
offer is only difference of time." 

That is the way he justifies his importunities, as if the- 
promise to confirm a sentence which is to be pronounced 


legally according to justice, and which all must presume, 
at least until delivered, to be an upright sentence, were 
the same thing with giving a sentence before the hearing 
of the cause. The promise of the Cardinals to confirm 
the sentence was a promise to confirm not an unjust 
sentence, but a lawful sentence, and Gardiner knew it 
to be so, for he refused the offer ; such an offer was of 
no use to the king his master, because there was not the 
slightest intention in England to pronounce sentence 
according to justice. 

On this day, Passion Sunday, Clement VII., with 
unwearied patience and the most generous forbearance, 
listened to the discussion held in his presence, and at the 
end said "that all that which with his honour he might 
do, he would do it gladly without tract or difficulty." 1 
In other words, he would even change the forms of his 
court, and shorten the process ; he would do everything 
but trench on the substance of justice. 

But Dr. Gardiner and if he had not confessed it him 
self, people might reasonably doubt the story said in 
reply to the Pope these words : 

" That which was not honourable for His Holiness to 
grant, was not honourable to be desired on the king s 
behalf. So as in this matter, if honour should be 
touched, it should be touched in them both. And it is 
not to be supposed that the king s highness, who hitherto 
hath had such respect of his honour, conserved and 
defended the same above all other princes, would now, 
in conducing this matter to effect, do anything that 
should stain or blemish the same, or that your grace 

1 Pocock, i. p. in. 


[Cardinal Wolsey], who hath such consideration, both to 
the king s honour, as his subject, and to the See Apos 
tolic, as member of the same, would be counsellor or 
minister in anything that should be dishonourable to 
both or either of them." 

Dr. Gardiner wrote this to Cardinal Wolsey, who 
knew of the money sent to Venice for evil usage, and he 
said it in the presence of Cardinal Pucci, to whom he 
knew that two thousand crowns had been offered by 
way of bribe by the archdeacon of Chester. 

The Pope hearing the king s ambassadors constantly 
saying that the only difficulty raised against the issuing 
of the commission was " the style and manner of late 
in every common cause used/ said that he would " set 
apart all style and common course of the court which 
could be no law to him." The sovereign Pontiff is 
not bound by the forms of his own courts ; he can 
change them when he will, and so when Gardiner urged 
upon him that he was asking for nothing unjust, and 
then said that his request was refused upon no grounds 
of justice, but of mere form, the Pope took him at his 
word, and said that if it be so, the forms of the court 
shall be changed. 

" Finally, the Pope s Holiness said/ writes Gardiner, 
" if in ike law these causes may be ground just and 
sufficient to maintain a sentence of divorce, he will make 
such a commission, any style or use to the contrary not 
withstanding. Adding thereunto, that if the emperor 
should grudge thereat, he cared not therefore, and having 
matter to defend justiciam causarum, he would by Breve 
signify to the emperor and the world that in modo 


administrandce justicicz he of duty ought to show all 
favour and grace to the king s highness for his mani 
fold merits ; and so he would. Wherefore His Holiness 
said he would hear what the Cardinal de Monte and the 
Cardinal Anconitane, unto whom he writeth in post, will 
say in these matters ; and hearing their judgments, he 
would shortly satisfy our requests and desires. And 
then devise with us upon sending a Cardinal, and who 
should be most meet for that purpose." * 

The Pope was willing to do all he could do for the 
king, but he would not do anything against the law 
under which the marriage had been made, for the queen 
had rights as well as the king. But if the forms of the 
law could be changed without wrong to the queen, the 
Pope said he would change them because Gardiner 
maintained in his presence that those forms kept the 
king from his just rights. Gardiner knew it was not so, 
and he pressed the Pope to make haste, but the Pope 
would not be hurried, " knowing of what moment and 
importance the matter is." 

The Pope now dismissed them. They had been three 
hours pleading their cause before him, and so they sent 
home their account by "my lord Eochford s priest," the 
chaplain of Sir Thomas Boleyn, Thomas Cranmer. 

This was the state of the question on Passion Sunday, 
March 29, 1528. 

Cranmer left Orvieto on the following Wednesday, 
April i, 1528, and on the game day Gardiner, Fox, 2 and 

1 Pocock, i. pp. in, 112. College, Cambridge, but according to 

^ 2 According to Le Neve (ed. Hardy, Tanner, December 28, at the end of 

iii. p. 683), Edward Fox was on the year, 
this day elected provost of King s 


Sir Gregory went to the Pope and pressed him " to 
resolve himself without delay or difficulty," for they had 
sent to Cardinal Wolsey, they said, a letter, in which 
they announced the successful issue of their mission. 
They therefore claimed the performance of the promise 
which the Pope had made. Clement VII. knew as well 
as they did all that he had promised, and he knew too 
that he had not promised anything which favoured the 
king more than the queen. So he told them now that the 
matter " consisted in the knowledge of the law, whereof 
he is ignorant, and must needs therefore depend upon the 
resolution of them which be learned in that faculty." 1 

Gardiner urged haste, and a decision in his favour, 
but the Pope merely replied " he would do all things 
not contrary to justice." 

The Pope had never promised to do that which Gar 
diner represented him as having promised ; that is clear 
from Gardiner s letter. But the man had raised hopes 
in England which were not sure to be realised, hence the 
importunity. He made it even a matter of complaint 
against His Holiness that he had himself sent a report 
home too highly coloured. He "trusted His Holiness 
would give credence to the king s books," that is, he 
would have the Pope give sentence against the queen 
without hearing what she had to say in defence of her 

Clement VII. always said that he would do all he 
could for the king ; but he also always added, that he 
would do nothing beyond or beside the law. Catherine s 
claims upon his justice and his grace were as strong and 

1 A letter of Gardiner, Fox, and lislied by Mr. Pocock, Records, i. p. 
Casali, dated April 13, 1527, pub- 120. 


as clear as were those of Henry. His answer to Gar 
diner was that he must advise with those who were 
learned in the law ; he would not make the law for 
the occasion ; he was the common judge of all the 

Gardiner finding him immovable in his resolve, tried 
to purchase justice by a promise of the " inestimable 
treasure of the king s good mind for recovery of the 
authority of the See Apostolic, with maintenance of the 
same." Clement VII. gently replied " he would do the 
best he could," and turned away from the priest, who 
did not remember to whom he was speaking. That very 
night Stafileo, who was believed in England to be in 
favour of the divorce, came to Orvieto. The next morn 
ing Gardiner and his colleagues called upon him and 
desired his help to obtain the commission, which was to 
" be directed to your grace [Cardinal Wolsey] alone, or 
jointly to you and another Legate." 

Stafileo had received other instructions from Henry 
himself; it is probable that the king had discovered 
that the Cardinal was not so zealous for the divorce as 
he had been. Anne Boleyn and her friends were not 
friends of the Cardinal, and the Cardinal had none ; the 
duke of Norfolk, her uncle, hated him, and others were 
then about the court ready to strike him if they had but 
the opportunity ; but be that as it may, the king in 
structed Stafileo to obtain a commission directed not to 
Wolsey. Stafileo told the ambassadors that it was not 
in his instructions to ask for a commission directed to 
the Cardinal, "but expressly the contrary;" and the 
reason the king gave him for thus putting the Cardinal 


on one side was, that the queen " might and would " 
decline the jurisdiction. 

On the 3d of April, " the Friday before Palm Sunday, 
the Pope s Holiness appointed solemnem consessum of the 
Cardinals de Monte and Sanctorum Quatuor, Staphileus, 
us, and the Dean of the Eota, to dispute and reason on 
the king s matter." The Cardinals were still of the old 
opinion, and the Pope bade Dr. Gardiner answer their 
reasons, who, according to his account, showed them to 
be groundless, convincing even the Pope himself that 
justice lay with the king. But Gardiner s words and 
Gardiner s doings are not quite consistent, for he threat 
ened the Pope if he did not consent, and laboured to 
terrify him, though he had convinced him. He also 
upbraided the Pope with the services of the king ren 
dered to the Holy See, thus unrequited and despised. 
The Pope was patient under the insult, and the Car 
dinals kept silence ; the effrontery of the speaker must 
have taken them by surprise. " These words were 
patiently heard of all parties," says Gardiner, "but 
nothing answered to them directly ; and so the day 
being then spent, the Pope s Holiness did arise." 

The next day, April 4, they "returned unto the 
Pope s Holiness, and spake roundly unto him." Their 
language must have been more insolent than on the 
day before, but they were speaking the language of 
Henry VIII. and Cardinal Wolsey, for Gardiner says 
that he spoke " as our instructions purporteth, and to 
that point that the king s highness would do it without 
him." This was said by a priest to the Pope : it was. 
a threat of schism. 

1 Pocock, i. p. 124. 


Clement VII. was patient even under this imperti 
nence. According to Gardiner, his only answer was, 
" Would it were done, and to the other words nothing, 
but sighed and wiped his eyes." Gardiner was neither 
moved by the distress of the Pope nor frightened by his 
own disorderly demeanour. Nevertheless he seems to 
have understood the Pope, for he does not recommend 
the king to divorce the queen and marry another, know 
ing well that if that were done the process would be 
short, and the sentence certain, against his master. 

At this time Clement VII. told the ambassadors in 
plain words, without any sort of disguise, that he could 
not grant their request, as, in fact, he never did. These 
are his words, according to the report of Dr. Gardiner : 

"In a matter in qua vertitwrjus tercii he could do 
nothing without the counsel of them, and wished that it 
were in his power to give the king s highness somewhat 
depending only of his own particular hurt or damage, 
without touching any other man s right, with suchlike 
words ; nothing sounding to the furtherance : but found 
ourselves in utter desperation." * 

Gardiner and his friends at last understood that the 
Pope, however ready or even desirous to please the king, 
would not please him by wrong-doing. The queen had 
rights as well as the king, and the princess Mary had 
rights also, which were not to be taken away merely be 
cause it pleased her father to do so. 

The ambassadors now changed their course. They had 
resolved, if they should fail to obtain the commission in 
the first form, to ask for a general commission ; and so 

1 Pocock, i. p. 127. 


Sir Gregory Casali, " speaking familiarly with the Pope s 
Holiness, said " so he writes " as of myself that I 
would know of my colleagues whether they will be con 
tent to take a general commission so His Holiness pass 
in secret manner the Decretal Commission. The Pope 
replied he might do so, and that he would himself 
" consider that matter." 

The next day, which was Palm Sunday, they went 
again to the Pope, giving him but little time to consider 
the matter. However, when they were admitted to his 
presence they found that the Pope had considered it. 
He would not grant any commission that was to be kept 
secret ; he must act openly, for if the commission was 
according to justice, it ought to be made public. Gar 
diner attempted to answer His Holiness as usual, without 
the least respect for him, but the Pope neither replied 
to him nor granted his request. " We could get none 
answer," he wrote to Cardinal Wolsey, " but so de 
parted." 1 

The king s ambassadors having utterly failed to obtain 
the commission in the form they preferred, and which 
they had been instructed to press for, were now com 
pelled to accept it in the form in which the Cardinals, 
whom the Pope consulted, were willing to grant it. 

The difficulty had been foreseen and provided against 
in England, and Dr. Gardiner, driven to accept the 
general commission, set himself at once " to the de 
vising of a general commission for a Legate, with such 
clauses as be contained" in his instructions. When he 
had done his work, he and his companions " showed the 

1 Pocock, i. p. 128. 



Commission" which he "had devised to Simonet, as the 
Pope s Holiness appointed" them. " For in these causes," 
he said, " His Holiness would of himself do nothing for 
anything we could do." The Dean of the Eota said the 
commission was good, " saving in the latter end," but 
it was too florid, and Gardiner expressed his willingness 
to correct his style. 

The Dean of the Kota informed the Cardinal Sancto 
rum Quatuor of the commission, and on the next day, 
April 6, when the three ambassadors went to that Cardi 
nal, they were told, even before they read it to him, 
"that it could not be granted." It was not for the sick 
man to tell the physician what remedies the latter should 
prescribe. But Dr. Gardiner insisted on it that the sick 
man knew his own disease in this case, and hath " know 
ledge in physic," and so "read unto him the commission 
by us devised." But as the Dean of the Eota objected 
to the latter part, so now the Cardinal Sanctorum Qua 
tuor objected to the first part, and told the ambassadors 
that "it was ordered by the Pope s Holiness" that they 
should go to the Cardinal del Monte. 

To the Cardinal del Monte they went, and with him 
they found the Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor, the Dean 
of the Kota, and the prothonotary Gambara. They read 
the commission again, but they were not allowed now to 
dispute with the Cardinals. They were ordered to with 
draw, the commission would be settled without them, 
and most certainly against them. 

Gardiner and his companions now could do nothing : 
they were not allowed to dispute with the Cardinals or 
with the Pope. " All that afternoon," says Gardiner, 


"and the next day till it was night, we could not by 
any means possible know what they had done." Never 
theless they were not idle, and certainly they were not 
civil, for they a went now to the Pope, from the Pope to 
them ;" but receiving no information, they "finally sent 
for Simonet, and desired him to show what was done. 
He said he was sworn he should show 7 them " nothing. " 

Late the next day, which was April 7, and " Tuesday 
after Palm Sunday, about two hours before night," they 
went to the Pope, who then showed them the commis 
sion as it would be issued. It did not please the ambas 
sadors, and Gardiner insulted the Pope anew, saying 
that "His Holiness having mind to delude and delay us, 
had chosen these men as instruments." And he said 
this, he writes, "with as sore words as I could devise." 
Clement V II. , unmoved by this insolence, replied calmly 
that he "must needs use other men s counsels." 

Nothing could be more reasonable, for the Pope was 
not a lawyer versed in the intricate processes of the 
law, but being the judge, he would not let Gardiner 
filch the queen s rights from her when the queen could 
not speak in her own defence. 

The Pope, however, offered Gardiner to accept the 
form which he had devised, if the Dean of the Eota would 
say that there " was nothing contrary to justice" in it. 
The Dean was sent for, and when he came was silent ; he 
would not answer without consulting the Cardinals. " It 
was then two hours within night." The ambassadors 
had been four hours with the Pope. But Gardiner was 
not weary, so he disputed with the Dean, and " trusting 
by importunity to have obtained our purpose, tarried 


with the Pope s Holiness five hours within night, which 
after the counting of the clock there was one of the clock 
after midnight, at which time we departed with none 
other resolution but that the day following, before 
dinner, we should have a certain answer whereunto to 

On Wednesday, April 8, they went to the Pope " two 
hours before dinner-time," taking with them " books of 
the law" out of which they proposed to prove that their 
demands were lawful, and that the Cardinals who op 
posed them were unreasonable. At last the Cardinals 
consented to hear the commission as proposed by 
Gardiner read, and made their corrections, to which the 
ambassadors assented, " saving in certain points." At 
" two of the clock at afternoon" they went away, having 
received a promise that they should have a commission 
to their " good contentment." But that is the statement 
of Gardiner. 

It is possible that Gardiner was too sanguine, and 
misinterpreted or misunderstood the Cardinals, for he 
has himself admitted that some of the corrections were 
not pleasing to him. 

That night they went again to the Pope, " and then 
finding our minute altered," says Gardiner, " from that 
was agreed on before, began a new disputation with 
Simonet, the Cardinals being absent." Gardiner says 
here that the Cardinals had not kept their word; he 
doubtless thought so, but jit is lawful for others to think 
that he has made a mistake, for in the course of this 
most disagreeable process there is no trace other than 
this, if this be one, of any double-dealing or unfairness 


of any kind on the part of the Cardinals and others with 
whom Gardiner had to treat. 

In this " disputation" with the Dean of the Kota the 
differences were reduced to two words. " We differed," 
says Gardiner, " but in two words in the whole commis 
sion : as the sign universal omnem to be added to 
potestatem, and the word nolente to the clause nolente 
aut impedito." 1 The Dean of the Kota would not give 
way to Gardiner s demands " without the advice of the 

The Pope, willing to do all he could, and not regard 
ing the impertinence of the ambassadors, though it was 
late at night, sent the Dean of the Eota and the protho- 
notary Gambara to ask the opinion of the Cardinals 
" upon those words." " The Cardinals," says Gardiner, 
" sent word that they were making collation, and on the 
morrow would look their books therein." 

Hereupon Gardiner lost his temper, or pretended to 
do so, and told the Pope that the Cardinals whom he 
trusted had " nothing done in correcting the commission, 
of learning, but only of ignorance and suspicion ; " and 
then insulted the Pope, saying that he (Gardiner) "took 
all this done as done by His Holiness commandment, 
qui oculos Tiabet et non videt;" and finally threatened 
the Pope with the loss of " the favour " of Henry VIII. 
and the ruin of the Holy See. 

The Pope was greatly disturbed so says Gardiner 
and well he might ; but his .enemy has not recorded a 

1 The clause was as follows : " Vobis omni recusatione et appellatione re- 

conjunctim,et,altero vestrum nolente motis, vices et omnem auctoritatem 

aut impedito, divisim, citra omnem nostram committimus et deman- 

personse aut jurisdictions gradum, damns." 


single word uttered in haste on the part of Clement VIL 
His Holiness was patient and forbearing in the presence 
of most detestable meanness, and when he recovered him 
self from the distress into which the language of Gar 
diner had plunged him, he consented that the two words 
about which the dispute turned now should be put into 
the commission. It being then " an hour past mid 
night," the Pope was delivered from the presence of the 
king s ambassadors. 

The commission, all disputing over, was drawn up 
and directed to Cardinal Wolsey, who was to be assisted 
in the execution of it by the archbishop of Canterbury, 
or any other of the English bishops ; the word omnem 
was inserted in the clause auctoritatem nostram commit- 
timus, according to Gardiner s wishes, but the other 
word nolente was not inserted, because the commission 
was directed to Cardinal Wolsey, and because it was 
necessary that he alone should pronounce the sen 

The commission was "not in all points" that which 
Gardiner desired, and as it had been drawn up by him 
in pursuance of the instructions he had received, never 
theless he thought it would answer the purpose. He 
had proposed to insert a clause in it to the effect that 
the Pope would confirm the sentence of the Legate, and 
refuse to call the cause up into his own court. But in 
this he failed. 

The commission was sealed April 13, I528. 1 Gar 
diner went at once to Kome to see Cardinal Campeggio, 
and Fox set out for England, carrying with him the 

1 Mr. Tierney has printed it from Eymer in his Dod., vol. i. p. 361. 


commission which had been obtained with so much diffi 

Fox landed at Sandwich on Saturday night. May 2, 
1528. "The day following being Sunday," he says in 
a letter to Gardiner, 1 " I made all diligence possible to 
wards Greenwich, where the king lay." And in Green 
wich the first message from the king to him was " to go 
unto Mistress Anne s chamber." 

The man went, he was a priest, and told Anne Boleyn 
that he had obtained the commission, under which the 
Cardinal of York was to dissolve the marriage of Henry 
and Catherine that Anne Boleyn might be queen of 
England, yet never the lawful wife of the king. Henry 
gave him time to tell his story, and then " came into 
the same chamber, after whose entry she [Anne] de 
parted." Having welcomed his chaplain, he bade him 
at once "to show him what was done in his cause/ 
The chaplain told him that the Pope would not say that 
the first marriage was invalid, but yet had granted a 
commission to the Cardinal of York to try the question, 
which he believed would satisfy the king ; whereupon 
the king "made marvellous demonstrations of joy, call 
ing in Mistress Anne, and causing me [FoxJ to repeat 
the same thing again before her." There was no shame 
in the palace of the king at Greenwich. 

"Whether the king was a better lawyer than Fox, or 
was more cautious, is not clear anyhow he bade his 
chaplain tell his story to the Cardinal, for the king 
would have my "lord s grace s judgment in that weighty 

1 Pocock, i. p. 141. 2 Ibid., p. 144. 


Fox, who had reached Greenwich at five o clock, must 
now go on to London, for the Cardinal, who had spent 
the Sunday as usual in the court, had left two hours 
"before the arrival of the chaplain. He reached Durham 
Palace at ten o clock, and though the Cardinal was in 
bed he was admitted at once into his presence, and the 
Cardinal heard from him all that had been done at 
Orvieto. The Cardinal of York had more at stake in this 
matter than Fox had, and was not so easily satisfied. 

" His grace seemed marvellously perplexed," says Fox, 
" thinking this commission to be of no better value than 
that was sent byGambara." 1 The poor chaplain was 
dismissed, the Cardinal bidding him to " depart for the 
night, and to leave behind the said commission." 

The Cardinal read the commission on the morning of 
Monday, May 4, 1528, and when he had mastered its 
meaning, " and his high wisdom well considered and 
pondered the same," he sent in the afternoon for his 
lawyer, " Master Dr. Bell," and Fox " to read the same 
before him, and in the presence of my lord of Eochford," 
who was the father of Anne Boleyn, and indecently 
earnest in furthering the divorce. They were all of one 
mind that the commission would do their work, and so 
they separated in good spirits. 

But on Wednesday the Cardinal consulted more 
lawyers, " Dr. Wolman, Dr. Benett, and other," and the 
issue of that consultation was not so satisfactory as that 
was at which Sir Thomas Boleyn was present. The 
matter was not so clear now, and the Cardinal began to 
see and to feel that the burden was laid on his shoulders, 

1 Pocock, i. p. 145. 


not on those of the Pope, where he had proposed to 
place it. 

Fox thereupon was instructed to direct Gardiner to 
press for the Decretal CommissioD which had been first 
asked for, and which the Pope had absolutely refused to 

On Saturday the Cardinal s difficulties seemed to have 
grown, he by that time being " perfectly informed," 
says Fox, by some of her counsel, that the queen was 
about to renounce any advantage she might have by the 
second Brief of Julius II., "refusing to enter the dispu 
tation of the validity of the same," and to rest her cause 
on the first Brief only. In order to meet this, the Car 
dinal directed Gardiner to find out from men learned in 
the law whether the marriage might not be declared 
null, because the impediment of public decency was not 
in terms removed. 1 The Cardinal was bent on breaking 
the marriage, but he wished to do so with a good con 
science, if that were possible, intending, says Fox 2 

" In this cause of so high consequence, wherein 
dependeth the wealth or ruin of this realm, the conser 
vation of his honour, or else immortal ignominy and 
slander, the damnation of his soul, or else everlasting 
merit, to proceed according to due order of justice, and 
to ground and firm his conscience upon so perfect and 
infallible rule of equity, that before God he may count 
himself discharged." 

In this mind the Cardinal desired Fox to write to 
Gardiner, and direct him to ascertain whether the 
Cardinal, whom Gardiner had assured the Pope to be 

1 Pocock, Records, i. p. 150. See 2 Ibid., p. 151. . 

the objection as put by the lawyers of 
the king afterwards, pp. 62, 96. 


impartial, could annul the marriage on the ground that the 
dispensation which made it lawful had been issued without 
the knowledge of the king. It is incredible that he can 
have been ignorant that the king s knowledge of the ex 
istence of the dispensation was an utterly irrelevant fact, 
perfectly immaterial to the issue. The Cardinal must 
have been by this time, even if he ever had any doubts, 
thoroughly aware that the marriage was simply unassail 
able, otherwise he could not have had recourse to these 
flimsy excuses for the doing of a great wrong. He knew 
he was shortly to sit in judgment in a public court as 
judge, nevertheless in the meantime he was the advo 
cate of the plaintiff, searching out the means whereby 
he might deliver judgment in his favour, and against 
the defendant, who, though the queen of England, was 
then a helpless woman in the power of a merciless hus 
band resolved to be rid of her at any cost. On this 
matter the king and the Cardinal were of one mind, and 
probably had no secrets from each other. 

" Yesterday, to my great marvel," writes Fox to Gar 
diner, 1 " and no less joy and comfort, his grace [the 
Cardinal] openly, in presence of Mr. Tuke, Mr. Wolman, 
Mr. Bell, and me [Fox], made protestation to the king s 
highness, that although he was so much bound unto 
the same as any subject might to his prince, and by 
reason thereof his grace was of so perfect devotion, faith, 
and loyalty towards his majesty, that he could gladly 
spend goods, blood, and life in his just causes : yet sith 
his grace was more obliged to God, and that he was sure 
he should render an account de operibus suis before 

1 Pocock, i. p. 153. 



Him, lie would in this matter rather suffer his high indig 
nation, yea, and his body jointly to be torn in pieces, than 
he would do anything in this cause otherwise than jus 
tice requireth ; ne that his highness should look after 
other favour to be ministered unto him in this cause, on 
his grace s part, than the justness of the cause would 
bear. But if the Bull were sufficient, he would so pro 
nounce it, and rather suffer extrema quceque than to do 
the contrary, or else contra conscientiam suam." 

Cardinal Wolsey spoke thus to the king, who knew 
that he was the first to move in the divorce, in the pre 
sence of Fox, who knew that he desired it, and who was 
to repeat the words to Dr. Gardiner, privy to all the 
secrets of the Cardinal, and whom the Cardinal had 
recommended to Clement VII. as his " other half." 

The more the commission was considered by the law 
yers the less it was liked. There was one clause in it 
which filled them with fear : Cardinal Wolsey was 
directed to discharge his duties under the commission 
prout animo conscienticeque tuce juris ratio persuaserit. 
Now juris ratio, said the lawyers, allows the queen the 
right to appeal at her good pleasure and liberty from 
whatsoever decree or sentence, either interlocutory or 
definitive, she will," and thereby prolong the litigation, 
" and finally frustrate the king s expectation, to the utter 
and extreme peril of all those that have intermeddled 
them in this cause." 

The result of this consultation was an order from the 
king to Gardiner to obtain ampler powers for the 
Legate, and to threaten the Pope with the revolt of 
England from the obedience of His Holiness if those 


powers were not granted. Then, to make matters cer 
tain, Dr. Gardiner was told that the king thought he 
had been negligent in his master s service; he must 
therefore, if he would recover the king s good graces, 
obtain the Commission Decretal, and also persuade the 
Pope to send a Legate to England, who with the Car 
dinal should give sentence in the king s cause. 

But the Pope made no further concessions than this, 
he allowed Cardinal Campeggio, at the request of the 
king s ambassadors, to be one of the judges with Cardinal 
Wolsey ; and now, in the new commission, the words 
for which Gardiner had so earnestly contended were in 
serted, thereby enabling either of the Cardinals in the 
absence of the other to give sentence in the cause. This 
commission was issued June 8, 1528, and in virtue of it 
the Legatine court was held in the following year. 

But Cardinal "Wolsey was not satisfied ; he wished to 
have larger faculties granted, and also a promise on the 
part of the Pope that the sentence he should give would 
never be reversed. He could not obtain any such pro 
mise, and Cardinal Campeggio, after long waiting, came to 
London in the beginning of October 1528, to determine, 
as men believed, the great dispute in favour of the king, 
and enable Anne Boleyn to call herself queen of Eng 

More than this, it was believed also by those who were 
about the king that the Pope had himself determined 
the question, and that the Cardinal Legates, when the 
time came for them to open their court, would sit merely 
to pronounce the sentence which His Holiness had already 
pronounced, and recorded in the Decretal Commission, 


which was believed to be at this time granted, and in 
the safe keeping of Cardinal Campeggio. 

This Decretal Commission, or, as it is also called, Bulla 
decretalis, was asked for in the very beginning of the 
process. The Cardinal of York begged for it with all 
earnestness, and it was generally regarded as a thing of 
the very last consequence, for the king and his ministers 
seem at times to confess that they had no means of at 
taining their ends if they could not obtain the Decretal 
Bull instead of the general commission. 

Clement VII. had been most earnestly and pertina 
ciously asked to grant this Decretal Commission ; and on 
his refusal, asked again to grant it "in secret manner," 
the king s agents promising not to publish it, " but in 
case your Holiness do not confirm the sentence;" 1 that 
is, promising not to publish it unless the Pope died be 
fore the end of the trial, for it is not to be supposed that 
they were asking a favour, and at the same time threat 
ening to use it against the Pope who granted it. 

Clement VII. was asked to do a dishonourable act, on 
the understanding that while he lived he should not be 
put to open shame. He told them in the beginning 
" that he must so do as the See Apostolic be not slan 
dered," 2 and he continued to tell them the same thing 
to the end. 

If the Commission Decretal is a lawful commission, 
not trespassing on the rights of others, the Pope said he 
would grant it ; but if it involved a breaking of the law, 
it should not be granted : and as for the secrecy, the 
Pope did not want that, nor indeed could there be any 

1 Pocock, Records, i. p. 127. 2 Ibid., p. 106. 


secrecy in the matter, so lie told the king s agents that 
if it was to be done it must be done publicly. 

Mr. Pocock in his "Records" 1 has printed a letter 
from Gregorio Casali, in which the writer says that the 
Pope had promised to grant the Commission Decretal if 
Cardinal Campeggio would be the bearer of it ; that he 
(Casali) thereupon went to Campeggio, entrapped him 
to undertake that matter, and then excused himself to 
the Pope as well as he could for the astuteness of his 
proceedings. The letter was written June 15, 1528, 
before Cardinal Campeggio left Rome. 

Mr. Pocock 2 has published also another letter on the 
same matter, written by Gregorio to the duke of Norfolk 
after the divorce, when his services were no longer 
wanted, and when he had found out that he had been 
serving a hard master, who would not, or could not, 
relieve him. In that letter he says, " I obtained also a 
Bull Decretal, which was delivered as the Cardinal of 
York in the king s name commanded unto the Cardinal 

Gregorio Casali magnifies his services to the duke of 
Norfolk, who had profited by the elevation of his niece 
and the ruin of the Cardinal of York. He had lost money 
by his labours, and his letter to the duke of Norfolk is 
the letter of a man boasting his skill and suggesting 
rewards. He claims the merit of having obtained the 
Decretal Bull, but he does not say that he ever saw it. 

Now this Commission Decretal had been drawn up in 
England, and had been presented to the Pope by the 
archdeacon of Chester, Dr. William Knight, apparently 

1 Vol. i. p. 172. 2 Records, ii. p. 517. 


without a shadow of suspicion that he was the bearer of 
a most dishonourable request. He probably learned its 
true nature from Cardinal Pucci when he heard him say 
" that it could not pass without perpetual dishonour 
unto the Pope, the king," and Cardinal Wolsey. 

Fox confessed to the king at Greenwich 1 that the Com 
mission Decretal, for which he and Gardiner had pressed 
the Pope so hard, was of so strange a character that the 
process of the court in London ought not to be founded 
on it, but rather on the general commission, which left 
the question of the validity or invalidity of marriages 
so contracted undetermined. But they wanted to have 
the Decretal nevertheless, though it was " to be kept 
secret, and to be shown to no man but only the king s 
councillors." 5 Still it was to be shoAvn for the further 
ance of the king s secret matter, for, says Gardiner, " the 
said commission in the first form, shown to such as have 
been of contrary opinion, shall and must satisfy them, 
and be regula to them that shall be judges how to pro 
ceed, seeing rescriptum Pontificis determining the case. 
And the second commission shall be that whereupon the 
jurisdiction shall be grounded to make process in the 
matter. The said first commission, obtained in secret 
manner, having none other use but to be seen there 
privily, shall be calculus et suffragium Pontificis in the 
law, and also pignus suce voluntatis et auctoritatis, that 
the sentence to be given conformably thereunto shall be 
confirmed." 3 

The Decretal, then, was a sentence of the Pope " deter 
mining the case ;" in other words, releasing Henry from 

1 Pocock, Records, i. p. 143. 3 Gardiner s letter, March 31, 1528, 

2 Ibid., p. 115. Ibid., pp. 115, 11 6. 


the bond of wedlock, if certain facts were once proved. 
It was to be kept secret on the whole, but communicated 
to the judges, who were to decide the question before 
them " conformably thereunto ;" that is, the Pope was 
to deprive the queen of her right by a sentence that she 
was never to hear, and by means of judges who were not 
to tell her why her marriage was null. 

Gregorio Casali says in this letter that the Pope 
would grant the Decretal unwillingly Pontifex invitus 
concedet lianc commissionem and would have no man 
know of it, either publicly or privately non vult quod 
sciatur neque palam neque secreto. 

This was written June 15, one week after the issuing 
of the commission to the two Cardinals, Campeggio and 
Wolsey, under which they were to try the question 
between the king and the queen. 

Gregorio Casali says that the Pope against his will 
promised to grant the Bull, and that the Bull was to bo 
kept from the knowledge of all men. Now, if it was to 
be kept secret, it is difficult to see the use of it. Possibly 
Gregorio Casali may have written more confidently than 
he ought. The Pope had hitherto refused the Commis 
sion Decretal, and refused also to do anything that was 
not to be made public. 

Three days before Cardinal Campeggio arrived in 
London, Cardinal Wolsey wrote to Gregorio Casali, 1 
instructing him to obtain the Pope s consent to a publi 
cation of the Bull which was to be kept secret. He 
asked for leave to show it to some members of the king s 
council who were opposed to the Cardinal s doings. He 

1 Pocock, i. p. 174, October 4, 1528. 


asked for the Bull, and in doing so promised to show it 
only to the king, because it was to remain a secret. 
Now he wishes to free himself of the conditions he had 
proposed in a word, to publish the Bull, for if once 
shown to his adversaries the secret could never be kept. 
It is not improbable that his end and aim were the 
publication of the Bull. 

It seems, from the Cardinal s words, that it was to 
him a matter of the utmost moment, not only to possess 
the Bull, but to be able to show it ; for he is most earnest 
and pathetic in his prayer to do so, saying that he could 
not pray more fervently to save his life, promising so 
to use it as to bring no risk, hurt, or hatred to the 
Pope. 1 If, then, the Cardinal had no misgivings about 
the justice of his procedure in asking for the Bull, it is 
hard to find a reason for this fear that the publication 
of it would be an evil thing for His Holiness. 

Cardinal Campeggio then arrived, but whether he had 
the Bull with him or not is a question ; there is no 
question, however, about this, that he did not deliver 
it up to Cardinal Wolsey or to Henry VIII. John 
Casali, in the absence of Gregorio, had an audience of 
the Pope he wrote an account of it December 17, 
I528 2 and in the name of Cardinal Wolsey com 
plained that the Bull was not shown in England, though 
the Pope had promised that it might be shown to the 
privy councillors by the king and the Cardinal. 

The Pope, when he heard this, forbade the speaker to 
touch upon that matter, for the Cardinal of York, whom 
lie had trusted, had deceived him ; s "he had given a 

1 Pocock, i. p. 177. s ikn] ., p. 65. "Sub fide ejus se 

2 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. 64, ed. deceptum esse." 


Decretal Bull to be shown to the king only, and then 
to be burnt forthwith." l The Pope did this, according 
to the account of John Casali, to save Cardinal Wolsey 
from certain destruction, but he never promised to give 
him leave to show it to any members of the council. 
Nothing more, he said, was asked of him, and he had 
the letters of the Cardinal of York to show that it was 
so ; 2 besides, if anything beyond this had been asked, it 
would not have been granted. 

According to John Casali, the Decretal of which Gre- 
gorio had obtained the promise was given, but it must 
be remembered that the words of the Pope are known 
to us through John Casali. It is probable, perhaps cer 
tain, that the Pope spoke in Italian, but the letter is 
written in Latin, and rests on the fidelity of the writer. 
The king s ambassadors were instructed from London 
to say to the Pope things that were not true, and it may 
well be that these men, in return, did not always tell 
the truth to their employers. The statement that the 
Pope granted the Decretal rests on the credit of Gregorio 
and John Casali, and against this, as will appear further 
on, is the declaration of Uberto Gambara, bishop elect 
of Tortona, that the Decretal never was granted. 

There is another difficulty raised by this letter of John 
Casali. He asked leave to show the Bull, and the Pope 
replied that the Cardinal never asked for a Bull which 
was to be shown. Three days afterwards the writer 
makes the same request, and the Pope answers, accord 
ing to him, in these words : 

1 Pocock, i. p. 65. "Bullamdecre- 2 Ibid. "Litteras ipsas reveren- 
talem dedisse, ut tantum regi osteii- dissimi Eboracensis proferre possum, 
deretur concremareturque statim." quibus id tantum, quod dixi, petit." 


" The Bull was not asked for on those terms, for it 
was to be shown to no one but the king and the Car 
dinal of York, and I hear now from Campeggio that he 
has done as much : that being so, the Bull, according 
to the agreement, must be burnt." 1 But the Cardinal s 
agent still pressed the Pope, and said that the Bull was 
granted to be shown to certain members of the king s 
council. The Pope s answer is again that it was not so, 
he had the letters of the Cardinal of York to show, and 
then added in his humility, " I am not telling lies/ 2 

Even after this John Casali returns to the subject, 
but is told that the Pope will not allow it to be spoken 
of, and learns that the Pope had ordered all traces of it 
to be blotted out of the Papal registers. Again, the 
Pope is troubled by John Casali, who asked him to find 
a way by which the Decretal might be shown to some 
members of the privy council of the king. If all this 
be true, John Casali must have believed that the Pope 
had spoken falsely, and that Cardinal Campeggio had 
written a falsehood in his letters to the Pope. The 
Decretal, if granted, was at this time not in existence, 
for it had been burnt : so said Cardinal Campeggio, and 
so believed the Pope, according to the account of John 
Casali, who, notwithstanding, presses the Pope to allow 
a document to be shown to others which the Pope has 
said is burnt, and which the Pope could not then allow 
to be shown without convicting Cardinal Campeggio of 
lying and himself of dishonest dealing. Even now the 

1 Burnet, iv. p. 68. " Hanc Bullam ad se scribere tantundem effecisse : 

non ea conditione petitam fuisse ut quo facto ex conventione Bullam 

ostenderetur cuiquam, prasterquam comburi debere." 

serenissimoregietdominationivestrse 2 Ibid., p. 69. " Nee loquor men- 

reverendissimse, et Campegium nunc dacia." 


answer of the Pope, according to John Casali, is, " It 
cannot be done, and I will not allow it." ] 

Edward Fox, the royal chaplain, wrote a letter at the 
Cardinal s direction to Dr. Gardiner, dated May 12, 
1528, one whole month before Gregorio Casali entrapped 
the Pope to promise the Decretal, and in that letter are 
these words : 2 

"Wherefore, and in consideration of the premisses, 
his grace [the Cardinal of York] willeth and desireth you 
that sith his grace intendeth never to make process by 
virtue thereof [the Bull Decretal], ne that it shall at 
any time be published, or showed to any person in the 
world, whereby may arise any the least slander, oblique 
damage, or prejudice to the See Apostolic, or to the 
Pope s person; with that also his grace intendeth 
nothing, but by showing thereof to the king s highness 
to acquire such authority and favour of the same as 
might turn to the singular advancement, inestimable 
benefit, and perpetual wealth of that See : of which thing 
his grace willeth also you make faith and promise in 
animam suam, under most sacred oath and obtestation 
unto His Holiness." 

It is plain, then, even from this, that the Cardinal 
of York had deceived the Pope : he had asked for a 
Decretal to be kept secret, shown only to the king, and 
now he, thinking the Decretal had been granted, forgets 
his promise and the condition, and proposes to show 
it to many in short, he proposes to publish it abroad. 

Those who were in the service of Henry VIII. speak 
quite distinctly that the Decretal Bull had been given ; 

1 Burnet, iv. p. 71. "ISTonpotest 2 Pocock, Kecordsof the Eeforma- 
hoc fieri; nee a me impetrari." tion, i. pp. 148, 149. 


-on the other hand, the Pope speaks, according to the tes 
timony of the king s agents, with less clearness. In the 
words attributed to him, even by the agents of the king, 
the existence of the Bull is not so much insisted on as 
the conditions under which it was asked for. There is 
no hint of it in the letters of Cardinal Campeggio, pub 
lished by Laemmer and Theiner. 

Then, again, it is not clear that the king ever saw it ; 
but it is clear from his own words that he has given, 
on two different occasions, different accounts of its 
disappearance. At one time he says that the Cardinals 
stole it, at another, that it was burnt. 

By an " order taken for preaching and bidding of the 
beads in all sermons to be made within this realm," 
published by Henry VIII. and Cranmer, A.D. 1533, after 
the marriage with Anne Boleyn, all preachers were to 

" Declare the false and unjust handling of the Bishop 
of Rome, pretending to have jurisdiction to judge this 
cause at Rome ; which in the first hearing thereof, did 
both declare and confess in word and writing the just 
ness thereof to be upon our sovereign s side, insomuch as 
by a Decretal delivered to the Legate here, then sitting 
for the same cause, he did clearly determine, . . . and so, 
eo facto, pronounced in the foresaid Decretal, the nullity, 
invalidity, and unlawfulness of their pretensed matri 
mony, which was by his law sufficient judgment of the 
cause ; which Decretal, by his commandment, after and 
because he would not have the effect thereof to ensue, 
was, after the sight thereof, imbesiled by the foresaid 
Cardinals, and one which then was here his cubicular, 

1 Jenkyns, Cranmer s Remains, iv. p. 254. 


contrary to all justness and equity : wherein he hath 
done our sovereign most extreme wrong." 

This is probably the account of the Decretal Commis 
sion which the king wished people to believe, and which 
he regarded as favourable to himself. But he does not 
say that he himself ever saw the instrument. 

Again the king, in a letter to His Holiness, written 
after the trial in the court of the Legates, thus writes : 

" Never was there any prince so handled by a Pope 
as your Holiness hath entreated us. First, when our 
cause was proponed to your Holiness, when it was ex 
plicate and declared afore the same ; when certain doubts 
in it were resolved by your counsellors, and all things 
discussed, it was required that answer might be made 
thereunto by the order of the law. There was offered 
a commission, with a promise also that the same com 
mission should not be revoked ; and whatsoever sentence 
should be given, should straight without delay be con 
firmed. The judges were sent unto us, the promise was 
delivered unto us, subscribed with your Holiness hand ; 
which avouched to confirm the sentence, and not to re 
voke the commission, nor to grant anything else that 
might let the same : and finally, to bring us in a greater 
hope, a certain Commission Decretal, defining the cause, 
was delivered to the judges hands." 3 

But the king did not say that he saw the commis 
sion he saw the promise, of which more hereafter and 
his not saying so is at least to be taken into account ; 
in another part of the same letter he returns to this 
Commission Decretal, which, he says, the Pope gave "to 

i Burnet, iv. 171. 


the Cardinal Campege to be showed unto us ; and after, 
if it so should seem profitable, to burn it, as afterwards 
it was done indeed, as we have perceived." ] Still he 
does not say that he had seen it. 

Cardinal Wolsey also complained, November i, 1528, 
in a letter to Gregorio Casali, that Cardinal Campeggio 
would not trust him with the Decretal, 2 and April 5, 
1529, instructed Sir Francis Bryan and Peter Vannes to 
" labour and insist that the king s highness, as need 
shall be, may use and enjoy the benefit of the Decretal, 
being already in my lord Cardinal Campegius hands." 

Now, if the Cardinal of York had seen at this time the 
Commission Decretal, he could not have said that it was in 
the hands of Cardinal Campeggio, because he knew that 
it must have been burnt ; for that was the condition un 
der which it was asked for, so says John Casali 4 in his 
letter, which the Cardinal must have received in the very 
beginning of the year, and before he wrote this letter. 

John Casali says something more: in his letter to 
Cardinal Wolsey, December 17, 1528, he tells him that 
the Pope would not listen to any observations about the 
Decretal, because he had been deceived by the Cardinal 
of York, who had asked for a Decretal Commission to 
be kept secret, but who now asked leave to show it to 
the king s councillors. 

If the Decretal Commission, then, had been given at 
all, it was given before Cardinal Campeggio set out on 
his journey from Kome, for he was to carry it to Eng 
land, show it to the king and the Cardinal, and then burn 

1 Burnet, iv. p. 172. 4 Ibid., 65. "Bullam decretalem 

2 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, dedisse, ut tantum regi ostenderetur, 
iv. pt. ii. 4897. coiicremareturque statim." See 

3 Burnet, Hist. Keform., iv. p. 90. above, p. ci. 


it forthwith. The Legate arrived in London, October 
7, and if he had such a commission, it is not probable 
that Henry and Cardinal AVolsey would have allowed 
him to keep it from them, seeing that they knew the 
conditions, namely, that the commission was to be 
shown them and then burnt. If they saw it, it was 
burnt at once ; but if they never saw it, it is probable 
that the commission never existed. It is not clear that 
the king ever saw it, and Cardinal Wolsey complained 
that Cardinal Campeggio would not trust him with it, 1 
and he has not said that he ever saw it. 

John Casali was instructed to say to the Pope that he 
(the Pope) had granted the Bull, and that it might be 
shown to the privy councillors of the king. To this His 
Holiness replied, that it was not asked for under that 
condition, but under the condition that it might be 
shown to the king and Cardinal Wolsey only ; and now, 
says the Pope, according to John Casali, " I hear from 
Campeggio that he has done as much." 2 

The question here is, whether Cardinal Campeggio 
showed the Decretal Commission to the king, or satisfied 
the promise of the Pope in some other way. 

Now, in January 1529^ Sir Francis Bryan and Peter 
Vannes, in quest of new Decretals, were at Bologna, 
entertained there by the prothonotary Gambara, then 
governor of the city. They asked him whether the 
Pope was likely to listen to them on the king s behalf, 
and " grant the most holy and most necessary prayer of 

1 Cardinal Wolsey s words, recited mihi suo collegae commissionem hanc 
in his letter by John Casali, are decretalem credat." 
(Burnet, iv. 69, ed. Pocock) : " Nullo 2 Ibid., p. 68. " Et Campegium 
pacto adduci vult Campegius] ut ad se scribere tantundem effecisse." 

3 Pocock, Eecords, i. p. 198. 


the king without thwarting it secretly." The protho- 
notary, replying probably to the latter words only, said 
there was not the slightest doubt of it. " Then," said 
Vannes, "if we shall find the Pope thus disposed, we 
shall secure the king s ends." Gambara answered, " I 
think you will obtain everything except the Decretals." 
The answer of Vannes is, " If so, the Pope will do 
nothing, for the Decretals are necessary for the king." 
The prothonotary then told them that after the de 
parture of Dr. Stephen Gardiner, who with Gregorio 
Casali had wrung from the Pope the promise of the 
first Decretal, His Holiness had consulted the Cardinals 
Pucci and Simonetti he had done so throughout and 
was by them advised that no such Decretal could issue. 
This is the account of Sir Francis Bryan and of Peter 
Vannes, given in their letter to Cardinal Wolsey. 

The prothonotary had been in England, for he was the 
bearer of the first commission, obtained by Dr. Knight, 
and not improbably perfectly well acquainted with the 
progress of the king s affairs. He certainly believed that 
the Decretal Commission was never issued, and in the 
strength of that belief told Sir Francis Bryan that the 
new Decretals then applied for would also be refused in 
the same way. 

But admitting that the Decretal Commission was at 
any time in the hands of Cardinal Campeggio, it was 
either held back by him, or if shown to the Cardinal of 
York, was found insufficient by that Cardinal for his 
purpose. The Cardinal complains that Cardinal Cam 
peggio would not intrust it to him, and he does not say 
that he ever saw it. The king says that Cardinal Cam- 


peggio held it, and said that it was stolen and burnt, 
but he does not say that he saw it. 

This, however, is clear, the Decretal Commission, if it 
ever existed, was so drawn up as to be useless to Cardinal 
Wolsey, for in April 1529 he entreats Gardiner, Sir 
Francis Bryan, and the others to devise some way to re 
lease him from his trouble by obtaining some instrument 
by which the Pope might be made a party consenting to 
the divorce. " And therefore/ he says, 1 " at the rever 
ence of Almighty God, bring us out of this perplexity, 
that this virtuous prince may have his thing sped to the 
purpose desired, which shall be the most joyous thing 
that this day on earth may chance, and succeed to my 
heart." Here, then, within one month of the trial, we 
have a clear confession that the Pope had granted 
nothing which could be twisted into any admission on 
his part that the king s marriage was otherwise than 
valid and lawful. 

In the instructions 2 given to Sir William Paget, the 
king says that Clement VII. gave to the Legates " one 
other special commission, in form of a Decretal : wherein 
the said Bishop of Eome pronounced and gave sentence 
that the king s highness matrimony was utterly nought 
and unlawful, and that therefore his highness might con- 
volare ad secundas nuptias." 

If the Pope did grant the Decretal in the terms sug 
gested by the king, the controversy is ended, and the 
marriage of Anne Boleyn was lawful. If the Decretal 
was ever drawn up in Eome, Gregorio Casali, who says 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. p. 88, 2 A.D. 1533. Ibid., vi. p. 96, ed. 

ed. Pocock. Pocock. 



lie obtained the promise of it from the Pope, must have 
known something of it. If Cardinal Wolsey saw it but 
for a moment, that was enough : he might have pro 
nounced sentence of divorce without fear. If the king 
believed that Cardinal Carnpeggio brought over with 
him a Decretal Commission by which the Pope declared 
his marriage " utterly nought and unlawful," it is most 
difficult to explain the doings and sayings of the king 
and the Cardinal of York after the arrival of Cardinal 
Campeggio. They no doubt expected a Decretal, and 
they believed perhaps that Cardinal Campeggio brought 
it ; but it is quite certain that they did not know the 
effect of it, and as certain that they applied for another 
commission with larger powers after the arrival of Car 
dinal Campeggio. The decretal, therefore, if it existed, 
was of no service ; but if it had been of the kind de 
scribed by the king, that was enough, the Pope had really 
determined the question, and the marriage of Henry 
and Catherine was never good. But then neither 
Henry nor the Cardinal ever acted as if that were true. 

The Cardinal of York had not been "perfectly in 
formed " by the queen s lawyer, who so far betrayed his 
trust that the queen would renounce all the advantage 
she had by the second Brief of Julius II. On the 
1 3th day of October, four months after that information, 
she demanded the production of the Brief. On the 
7th of November she renounced the benefit of a clause 
in it, but that was because it was not necessary, and 
because the clause was put in to all appearance ex abun 
dant cautela, seeing that the queen protested always, 
and maintained on oath, and was never contradicted by 


the king, that she never had contracted affinity with 

Now this second Brief of Julius II. was so clear that 
while it stood there was no way open to the Cardinal 
to his end. Hence it became necessary to say it had 
been forged, but after a time it was found impossible 
to assail the Brief in that way. Accordingly a letter 1 
was written in London, in the name of the two Car 
dinals, Legates of the Holy See, in which confession is 
made that the Brief could not be touched, and that the 
Pope only could declare it a forgery. 

That Brief left no means of escape. The Cardinal of 
York, therefore, denies that there were any traces of it 
in the records of the realm, and maintains the impro 
bability that any one could have foreseen the dispute 
twenty years before, and have provided against it, as it 
is provided in the second Brief of Julius II. The Car 
dinal was unjust to the lawyers of Henry VII. Mr. 
Pocock 2 has printed a letter of Ferdinand, the queen s 
father, written at Barcelona, August 23, 1503, in which 
the king says that the English lawyers, for the sake of 
shutting the door against all discussion of the invalidity 
of the marriage, required the insertion of the words which 
covered the possible affinity of Henry and Catherine. 

Though the Brief was unassailable in itself, the Car 
dinal of York need not have troubled himself about it if 
the Pope had granted the Decretal. This application, 
therefore, to the Pope, to be made by the two Legates, 

1 Bui-net, Hist. Reform., iv. p. 102, adelante en la succession de los liijos 
ed. Pocock. . . . que agora seha asentado se deve 

2 Records of the Reform., ii. p. 427. dezir en la dispensation que con- 
" Ha parecido a los letrados de Ingle- sumaron el matrimonio." 

terra, . . . porquitar toda duda para 


is another and perfect confession that no such Decretal 
was ever issued. 

The second alleged grievance of the king, the violation 
of a promise, comes now to be considered. The king in 
his last letter to the Pope, already referred to, says that 
His Holiness had promised to confirm the sentence of 
the Legates, not to quash the commission, nor to stop 
the process before it came to its legal ending. Of this 
promise, he says that it was " delivered unto us sub 
scribed with your Holiness hand." 

This is the " pollicitation " of which so much has been 
said, and by which it is believed that the Pope Clement 
bound himself to do the will of Henry VIII. The king 
himself instructs Sir William Paget to speak of it to the 
foreign powers to whom Henry sent him in these terms : 

" And at time of sending of the said commission he 
[the Pope] sent also down unto the king s highness a 
Breve written with his own hand : wherein he did also 
approve the justice of the king s cause, in like manner 
as he did in his Commission Decretal ; and promised unto 
the king s highness, quam sanctissime sub verbo ponti- 
ficis, that he would never afterward advocate the said 
cause out of the realm of England, but would suffer it 
to have the due course and order of entreating of the 
same within the king s highness realm ; which his sen 
tence and promise [notwithstanding], yet the said Bishop 
of Eome, contrary to his own conscience and knowledge, 
what was the very truth and justice in the king s high 
ness cause, and to the extent he might molest and 
trouble the same, decreed out sundry citations," &c. 


Here the king says that the Pope sent him a " Breve 
written with his own hand ; " and it may be supposed, 
though he does not say so, that the king received and 
saw the " Breve ; " nevertheless there are reasons for 
doubting the accuracy of the statement thus made by 
the king, and it is certainly probable that he did not 
carefully consider the contents of the " Breve," or that 
he misunderstood it. 

There remains, then, the " pollicitation," or promise of 
the Pope to confirm the sentence of the Legates, and as the 
sentence of the Legates is always taken to be in favour 
of the king, it is said that the Pope promised to annul 
the marriage. Now, if His Holiness made that promise in 
the terms of the "pollicitation," which lord Herbert 1 
published and Burnet 2 copied from him, the king could 
not complain of the Pope, for in that instrument the 
invalidity of his marriage was so far secured for him 
that there was nothing left but the sentence of the 
Legates ; and that once pronounced, there was the pro 
mise of the Pope not only to confirm that sentence, but 
to defend it. This promise was drawn up in London, 
but there is, however, no proof that this was the promise 
which the king received, "subscribed" with the hand 
of His Holiness, on the 23d day of July 1528, as the 
document purports to be. 

But if that be the "pollicitation," and if the Pope 
signed it, Cardinal Wolsey did not think it sufficient, 
and it is not to be supposed that the Cardinal allowed 
a document to pass, which should prove worthless, after 

1 Life of Henry VI II., p. 249. 

2 Hist. Reform., vi. p. 26, ed. Pocock. 


the Pope had signed it, and therefore it is most reason 
able to believe that the " pollicitation " which the Pope 
signed was couched in other terms. 

On the 2ist of April 1529, Sir Francis Bryan sends 
an account of his doings to Henry VIII. , and confesses 
that the Pope would not consent to do that which the 
kinsf desired of him. 


" "Were I to write otherwise," says Bryan, 1 " I should 
put you in hope where none is ; and whoever has told 
you that he [the Pope] will, has not done you, I think, 
the best service. There is no man more sorry to write 
this news than I am. No men are more heavy than we 
are that we cannot bring things to pass as we would. 
I trust never to die but that your grace will be able to 
requite the Pope and Popys, and not be fed with 
their flattering words. I have written to my cousin 
Anne, but I dare not write to her the truth, but will refer 
her to your grace to make her privy to all the news." 

This confession of Sir Francis Bryan is very plain ; 
the writer despairs of the Pope, and dares not tell Anne 
Boleyn how hopeless is her cause. It is clear, then, 
so late as April 1529, and six months after the arrival 
in London of Cardinal Campeggio, that the Pope had 
done nothing to further the ends of the king. 

And in May 1529, within a month of the trial, Car 
dinal Wolsey himself, having made no progress whatever 
in the cause, having failed to bind the Pope, and being 
left to face the law, according to which the marriage of 
Henry and Catherine was as lawful as that of Adam and 
Eve, supplicated most piteously the king s ambassadors 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, iv. pt.UiL 5431. 


and his own to press upon the Pope with all earnestness 
the great necessity of giving way to the king s desires. 
He had misled the king, and the burden he had laid on 
his own shoulders, of his own will, was so heavy that it 
threatened to crush him. He implied throughout his long 
letter, written within a month of the trial, that he had not 
been able to compromise the Pope, or to obtain anything 
from him that could be used to the damage of the queen. 
He pressed Dr. Gardiner and Sir Francis Bryan to obtain 
even new and more ample faculties for himself and Car 
dinal Campeggio, and then revealed the secret of his diffi_ 
culties ; he admitted " the large promises which he [Car 
dinal Campeggio] and I so often have made unto the 
king s highness of the Pope s fast and assured mind, to 
do all that His Holiness, etiam ex plenitudine potestatis, 
might do." 1 It seems, then, that the Pope had promised 
nothing, and that the promises made to the king were 
really made by the Cardinal of York, who now begs the 
Pope to rescue him out of the perils he had brought on 
himself by his fatal gift of self-confidence. 

Hitherto, then, the Cardinal had not been able to get 
any promise from the Pope that was of any service to 
him in the trial which was so soon to take place before 
him ; for that very promise or " pollicitation which the 
king said he had received from the Pope, and which, he 
not being a lawyer, understood not perhaps also the 
true meaning of it was kept from him was in the eyes 
of the Cardinal not to the purpose ; these are his words : 

" And amongst other things, whereas ye, with these 
last letters, sent the Pope s pollicitation for the non-inhibi- 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. 97, ed. Pocock. 


tion or avoking of the cause, the ratifying and confirming 
of the sentence ~by us his Legates herein to be given, and 
other things mentioned in the same, ye shall understand 
that the said pollicitation is so couched and qualified, as 
the Pope s Holiness, whensoever he will, may reserve : 
like as by certain lines and annotations which in the 
margin of a copy of the said pollicitation I send you 
herewith, ye shall perceive more at large." 

Here, then, is a plain confession that the Pope never 
did bind himself to confirm the sentence of the Legates 
absolutely. No such promise appears in Gardiner s cor 
respondence, though he once said that such a promise 
was given him, and he was allowed to say so without 
rebuke by the Pope, who probably thought it unseemly 
to dispute with Gardiner. 

The promise, then, or pollicitation, about which so 
much has been said, is no promise, for Cardinal "Wolsey 
confesses that the Pope was never bound to leave the 
cause to be decided by his Legates. 

There is more behind. Cardinal Wolsey having told 
the ambassadors that the commission already issued was 
not large enough for the purpose, and that the pollicita 
tion did not bind the hands of the Pope, thus proceeds 
in his instructions : 

" After your other suits for the ampliation of the new 
commission, if any such may be attained, brought unto 
as good a purpose as ye can, ye shall by some good way 
find the mean to attain a new pollicitation, with such, 
or as many of the words and additions newly devised 
as ye can get." 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. p. 98. 


It is plain from this that the instrument which the 
king described as a promise to confirm the sentence of 
the Legates was in the eyes of the Cardinal not so effi 
cacious as it pleased the king to represent it. He 
certainly is dissatisfied with it, and urges on the ambas 
sadors the desirableness of obtaining another. 

On the 4th of May Gardiner wrote to the king in a 
letter which Burnet l has published, these words : 

"All jointly, and I myself apart, applying all my 
poor wit and learning to attain at the Pope s hand some 
part of the accomplishment of your highness desires, 
finally have nothing prevailed." 

Here, then, Gardiner admits that after all his cunning 
and his blustering he had obtained nothing. The Pope 
had not promised to change the law for the purpose of 
gratifying the king, and he had not decided that his 
marriage was unlawful. 

Moreover, as for the " promises " which the Cardinal 
of York said were made to the king by Cardinal Cam- 
peggio, Gardiner in the same letter wrote these words : 

" But it seemed strange to us to read in Cardinal 
Campegius letters that neither he ne Campanus made 
on the Pope s behalf any promise to your highness, but 
only in general terms." 

The failure was so thorough, and the danger to the 
Cardinal was so great, that the archbishop of York, at 
this time bishop of Winchester also, Cardinal of the holy 
Eoman Church, directed a priest, the man who succeeded 
him in the see of Winchester, to present himself before 
the Vicar of our Lord, without the truth upon his 


1 Hist. Reform., vi. p. 23, ed. Pocock. 


" To show unto the Pope s Holiness, by way of 
sorrow and doleance, how your courier to whom ye com 
mitted the conveyance of the said pollicitation so chanced 
in wet and water in the carriage thereof, as the pacquet 
wherein it was, with such letters as were with the same, 
and amongst others the rescripts of pollicitation, was 
totally wet, defaced, and not legible, so as the pacquet 
and rescript was and is detained by him to whom ye 
direct your letters, and not delivered amongst the other 
unto the king s hands ; and unless His Holiness, of his 
goodness unto you, will grant you a double of the said 
pollicitation, ye see not but there shall be some notable 
blame imputed unto you, for not better ordering thereof, 
to the conservation of it from such chance." 1 

It is to be observed that all this was not the truth. 
The pollicitation had reached England in a state of per 
fect preservation. The Cardinal had had it copied, for 
the purpose of writing " certain lines and annotations," 
which he considered pertinent, " on the margin " thereof 
But for all this, the king s ambassadors were instructed 
to say to the Pope that the pollicitation " was totally 
wet, defaced, and not legible." 

The intention of the Cardinal of York was dishonour 
able : he hoped to obtain by fraud -the ample powers 
which he could not obtain honestly, for Dr. Gardiner 
was instructed to say to the Pope, provided His Holiness 
granted another pollicitation, that the new one would be 
as like the old as possible, while in truth Gardiner was 
to make it after the new device of the Cardinal. These- 
are the directions of the latter : 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. p. 99. 


" And tlius coming to a new pollicitation, and saying 
ye will devise it as nigh as ye can remember according 
to the former, ye by your wisdoms, and namely ye, Mr. 
Stevyns, may find the means to get as many of the new 
and other pregnant, fat, and available words as is pos 
sible, the same signed and sealed as the other is, to be 
written in parchment ; the politic handling whereof the 
king s highness and I commit unto your good discretions, 
for therein, as ye, Mr. Stevyns, know, resteth a great 
strength and corroboration of all that shall be done there 
in decision of the king s said cause, and as ye write may 
be in manner as beneficial to the king s purpose as the 
Commission Decretal." 

It appears, then, by the admissions of the Cardinal of 
York, that within a month of the trial the sovereign 
Pontiff, pressed and harassed as he was by the persistent 
importunities of the king, had granted nothing whatever 
beyond that which the law allowed to any suitor. The 
queen s defence had not been made even difficult by any 
act of the Pope ; and the pollicitation itself, with the 
Commission Decretal, if ever issued, took nothing away 
from the legal rights of the queen. Even now the 
Cardinal confesses that the Commission Decretal was of 
no force when he tells Dr. Gardiner that the new pollici 
tation, if it could be had, may be " as beneficial " as that 
commission. If the pollicitation was not of greater 
efficacy than the commission, he needed it not, if he had 
received the commission, and therefore it is plain that 
the Cardinal, unable to obtain the "Commission Decretal/ 
forced himself to be content with the pollicitation, which 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. p. 99. 


lie does not appear to have ever obtained in the form he 

Besides, the Cardinal has not left the matter in the 
dark ; he tells the ambassadors in very clear language 
that after all their efforts and his, Clement VII. had not 
done any one thing for which he had been importuning 
him so long. In spite of all the " pursuits, instances, 
and requests " which were made " for the furtherance " 
of the king s " great and weighty cause," and notwith 
standing the " importance of this matter, the justness 
of the thing itself, reason, duty, respect to good merits, 
detecting of falsities used, evident arguments and pre 
sumptions," the Pope "neither dare nor will do any 
thing displeasing to the emperor," so that "it were in 
manner all one to prosecute the same at the emperor s 
hands as at the Pope s, which so totally dependeth upon 
the emperor." 

It has been the custom of many generations now for 
men who have not been able to make the Pope their 
partner in sin, to say that he refused their request for 
some unworthy reason, such as either the fear of certain 
persons, or an excessive desire to please some one else. 
Cardinal Wolsey was labouring to break a lawful mar 
riage he knew it was lawful, if he knew anything and 
would not allow that the sovereign Pontiff had any other 
reason for maintaining it than fear of the emperor. 
Unable to break the Pope, or bend him to his will, the 
Cardinal forced himself, against his will, to be content 
with the faculties he had received, and open the court 
with Cardinal Campeggio ; but he did not wish the Pope 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. pp. 93, 94. 


to know it, hoping by concealing it from him to obtain 
more ample powers. 

" Wherefore," he writes to the ambassadors, "to show 
you in counsel, and to be reserved unto yourselves, the 
king s highness finding this ingratitude in the Pope s 
Holiness, is minded for the time to dissemble the matter, 
and taking as much as may be had and attained there to 
the benefit of his cause, to proceed in the decision of the 
same here, by virtue of the commission already granted 
unto me and my lord Legate Campegius." l 

This was written within a month of the trial, and ifc 
appears then by the confession of the Cardinal of York 
that His Holiness Clement VII. had neither done nor 
promised to do anything whatsoever contrary to the 
ordinary process of the law, and the rights of the queen 
had not been sacrificed to the importunities of her 

There is a further testimony to the integrity of the 
Pope in the letter of Dr. Bennet, Casali, and Vannes to 
the Cardinal of York, written from Eome July 9, 1529. 
They in an audience of His Holiness say to him having 
just received their letters from England with an account 
of the opening of the Legatine court and the appeal of 
the queen that they knew nothing of the legal process 
then begun ; they fully believed that it had not been 
begun, and that no sentence would be pronounced 
unless the king could be assured that it would be in his 
favour." 2 

1 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. p. cessum nullum istic actum ; aut 
94. sententiam ullam definitam iri, nisi 

2 Pocock, Records, i. p. 252. "Re- regia majestas securissimum primo 
spondimus, nos quidem de processu omni ex parte suae causse exitum 
nihil scire, et plane credere, pro- habuerit." 


It seems from this statement of the king s ambassadors 
that the king had obtained neither a Commission Decretal 
"defining the cause," nor a " pollicitation " binding the 
Pope to confirm whatever sentence the Legates might 

There is still further testimony to the integrity of the 
Pontiff; for after the trial and the admission of the 
queen s appeal, the bishop of Tarbes, undertaking the 
king s cause, asked the Pope whether he would " molest " 
Henry if he put an end to the matter by such means as 
his " conscience " approved of. That was no doubt the 
same thing as asking the Pope whether he would over 
look the proposed bigamy of the king. The Pope said 
he would " consult" thereupon in his council; but 
when the bishop went further, and threatened the Pope 
" with a greater ruin in Christendom than he hath seen 
hitherto " if the king were not satisfied, the reply of 
Clement VII. was, according to Dr. Bennet, the king s 
ambassador, 1 that if these evils were to come, he would 
rather they 

" Should follow for doing his duty than the like should 
follow for lack of doing his duty; and added unto it 
that he was utterly determined to proceed according to 
justice and the order of the law; and repeated again 
that he nother for your highness [the king], neither for 
the French king, nother for the emperor would transgress 
one hair of justice." 

Harpsfield also, who saw the letters that w~ere written 
in the matter of the divorce, says that 

" The king made marvellous instant suit that either 

1 Pocock, Records, i. p. 453. 


the Pope would sign a Decretal drawn out for his pur 
pose, or give a new commission to the Legates that they 
might proceed, all manner of appellation set aside, and 
that he would by his handwriting send word to the king 
that he would not advocate the matter to Borne." But 
nothing of all these things could be granted. 

Gregorio Casali is the man who wrung from the Pope 
the promise of the Bulla decretalis, or Decretal Commis 
sion, yet he as late as February 16, 1529, admits that 
the Bull was never granted, and that it was wasted 
labour to ask for it. He writes in that sense to his 
cousin, Vincent Casali: 1 

"I do not know what to hope of Dr. Stephen 
[Gardiner ] s mission, and how far the Pope ought to 
pronounce the Brief produced by the queen a forgery. 
I think His Holiness will do nothing ; and you may 
tell Wolsey so in the event of his desiring my opinion. 
I hear you have told him that if the Pope s fears were 
removed he would do everything for the king licita et 
illicita. But if you rightly remember, I told you that 
the Pope would do all that could be done ; for there are 
many things which the Pope says he cannot do, vetuti 
esset Bulla decretalis ; and so he will say of that Brief, 
that he can pass no decision on a Brief emanating from 
Pope Julius, in the event of its being brought from 

This confession of his want of success made by Gre 
gorio did not hinder him from boasting later that he had 
"so handled" the Pope as to have obtained the Bulla 
decretalis, which now he says is one of the things the 
Pope cannot do. 

1 State Papers, Brewer, iv. pt. iii. 5302. 


While the king was pressing on the Pope the justice 
of his cause and the torment of his conscience, he did 
not wholly trust to that justice. In the first place, he 
threatened to depart out of the unity of the Church, if 
he could not obtain his desires, and he proposed to reach 
his end by either of three different roads. The first was, 
a Papal dispensation to have two wives at once ; the 
second, to bring the person of the Pope into his power ; 
and the third, to make Cardinal Wolsey Pope. 

Among "the heads of instructions given" to Sir 
Francis Bryan and Peter Yannes in December 1528, 
which Mr. Pocock 1 has printed, is this : 

" Quod possit duas ducere uxores cum legitimatione 
prolis ex secundd." 

It was thought possible in England that the queen might 
be persuaded or frightened to take the veil, and that the 
king might then be dispensed from the bond of matri 
mony and be allowed to marry. But when afterwards 
the queen was found to be immovable, the king then 
returning to the proposal sent through Knight, asked 
for a dispensation to enable him to marry while the first 
marriage subsisted in other words, to have two wives 
at once. Harpsfield, 2 having "seen the very originals," 
thus recounts the facts: 

" There was also in the said instructions an advertisement that the 
said agents should perfectly and substantially instruct themselves 
against the coming of Mr. William Knight, the king s principal secre 
tary, of certain questions, by the learning, experience, and knowledge of 
the best advocates they could get in the court of Rome, to be retained 
of the king s counsel, and to be of his grace s part made sure by secret 
rewards, pacts, and conventions that afterwards they should not be 

1 Records, i. 189. 

2 Treatise of Marriage, bk. ii. p. 114, Evston MS. 


allured or drawn to the adverse part : the questions were propounded 
in form following, whereof I will shife no part of the king s own 
words : 

" Whether, if the queen, for the great and manifold effects that may 
ensue thereof, can be moved and induced to take vow of chastity or 
enter into religion, the Pope s Holiness may, ex plenitudine potestatis, 
dispense with the king s highness to proceed thereupon ad duas nuptias, 
and the children to be procreate in the same to be legitimate. 

" And it be a thing that per case the Pope may not do, standing such 
laws as be already, both divine and human, and using his ordinary 
power, yet whether His Holiness may do it of his mere and absolute 
power, as a thing that the same may dispense in above the law, must 
perfectly and secretly be understood and known, and what precedent 
hath been seen of like matter, or how the court of Borne shall define 
and determine, and what it doth use, or may do therein, so that it may 
perfectly and assuredly appear that no exception or scruple, question or 
doubt, can or may be found, or alleged hereafter in anything that may 
or shall be affirmed to be in the Pope s power touching the matter." 

But as it was possible that the queen might refuse to 
resign her rights as the king s wife by entering into re 
ligion, Henry provided for that difficulty in the follow 
ing way: his agents were to inquire of the lawyers 
whether he might not deceive the queen. 

"The king s said orators" thus Harpsfield witnesses 
" shall therefore in like wise ripe and instruct them 
selves, by their secret learned counsel in the court of 
Kome, if for so great a benefit to ensue unto the king s 
succession, realm, and subjects, with the quiet of his 
conscience, his grace should promise so to enter religion 
or make vow of chastity for his part, only thereby to 
induce the queen thereto, whether in that case the 
Pope s Holiness may dispense with the king s highness 
for the same promise, oath, or vow, discharging his 
grace clearly of the same, and thereupon to proceed ad 

secunda vota cum legitimatione prolis, as is aforesaid." 



The king having directed his ambassadors to ascertain 
the effects of the queen s entering religion of her own 
freewill, and the effects of her entering religion under 
the delusion that the king was bound by his proposed 
promise or vow, proceeds a step further, for there was 
another way, as he thought, out of the difficulty. If the 
ambassadors should be told, as undoubtedly they would 
be, that the bond of marriage could not be broken, and 
that the queen, whether she became a religious or not, 
would be still and always his wife, 

" Then shall the king s said orators perfectly inquire 
and search whether the Pope s Holiness may dispense 
with his grace, upon the great considerations that rest 
herein, to have duas uxores, and that the children of the 
second matrimony shall be as well legitimate as those of 
the first." 

Henry VIII. would not accept a dispensation to enable 
him to marry the widow of his brother as a sufficient 
safeguard of his conscience, but he was ready to accept 
a dispensation for bigamy, and believed that it was 
within the jurisdiction of the Pope to grant it. 

The Cardinal of York was ready to accept bigamy as 
the way out of the troubles which he had created. In 
his letter to Gregorio Casali, November i, I528, 1 he 
desired him to obtain from His Holiness the necessary 
powers whereby he might, with Cardinal Campeggio, 
authorise the king, on the queen s taking the veil, to 
contract a second marriage, the children of which should 
be as legitimate as the princess Mary. 

Mr. Pocock 2 has published the " Draft of a remon- 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, 2 Records, i. p. 212. 
vi. pt. ii. 4897. 


strance to be made on a personal interview between the 
queen and the Legates, May 1529," and the contents are 
said to be " Allegations delivered by the king s high 
ness." In that instrument the queen was to be told that 
she need not fear that the king would marry anybody if 
she should enter into religion, because by the law the 
king s highness may not take another wife during the 
lifetime of the queen ; " neither yet the Pope s Holiness 
can [dispense] with his grace so to do." 

If the king was sincere in this, it is difficult to discover 
why he wished the queen to take the veil ; for his am 
bassador in Eome had written to him, on the 3d of 
March, to the effect " that the most learned of the 
advocates consulted thinks that the Pope cannot give a 
dispensation that the king may marry again on the 
queen entering a religion." x 

The second plan, that of brute force, which was devised 
in the interest of the king, was to be carried out in this 
way : the king of England and the king of France were 
" to furnish the charge for one thousand, fifteen hundred, 
or two thousand men, to be in guard at the Pope s 
person." 2 

Harpsfield, who saw the letters of the Cardinal on this 
matter, thus speaks of the guard proposed to be furnished 
for the service of Clement VII. : 

" Neither think you that this our declaration touching 
this plan and presidye is impertinent to our principal 
matter, for the very mystery thereof you shall now hear 
out of the Cardinal s own letters sent to Mr. Secretary 
and Mr. Bennet, which words were written in ciphers, 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, 2 Fiddes, Life of Wolsey, Collec- 
iv. pt. iii. 5344, tions, p. 165. 


and purport thus : As you know, and as it was declared 
to you in council, one of the things noted to be much to 
the advancement of the king s cause was, that the Pope s 
Holiness, taking this presidye, should thereby be brought 
to have as much fear and respect towards the king as he 
hath now towards the ambassador [the emperor], and 
consequently be glad to grant the king s desire, though 
you were ordained to show the French king that it 
was done for his sake, and to the Pope for his, and, 
indeed, it was done for the benefit of the king s 
affairs. " 1 

The Pope never accepted the guard, and was in all 
probability as perfectly aware of the Cardinal s inten 
tions as was the Cardinal himself, who, blinded by his 
vanity, imagined that so plain a trick could not be seen 

The third plan of the king was the election of the 
Cardinal of York to the sovereign Pontificate of Holy 
Church. While Cardinal Campeggio was in England 
Clement VII. fell ill, and it was reported, and for a time 
believed, that he was dead. Thereupon the king at once, 
February 6, 1529, directed his agents in Eome to use all 
their skill and diligence to bring about the election of 
the Cardinal Wolsey. Nor did he hide from them that 
the Cardinal s election was desired by him for the pur 
pose of divorcing the queen, it being, he confessed, not 
unknown to them how " necessary, and in any wise ex 
pedient, it shall be for the perfection of the king s said 
great and weighty matter to them committed to have the 

1 Treatise of Marriage, bk. ii p. Papers, Henry VIII., vol. iv. pt. iiL 
113, Eyston MS. Mr. Brewer has 5179 ad fin. 
given an account of this in State 


said lord Legate of York, and none other, advanced to 
the said dignity Papal. " 1 

The king impresses upon them that for "the perfect 
conducing of the king s great matter, which suffereth no 
tract, delay, or negative, it shall be found that there is 
none other for this purpose but only the said lord Legate 
of York." Moreover, he instructs them to bribe the 

The Cardinal of York also lays aside his humility, and 
directs Gardiner, his former secretary and his other half, 
to forward his election. On the day after the king s in 
structions were prepared, February 7, Cardinal Wolsey 
tells Gardiner that " it is expedient to have such one to 
be Pope and common father of all princes as may, can, 
and will give remedy to the premisses." Farther on he 
adds : " When all things be well pondered, and the 
qualities of all the Cardinals well considered absit 
verbum jactantice there shall be none found that can 
and will set remedy in the foresaid things but only the 
Cardinal Ebor." 

The "premisses" and the "foresaid things" was the 
" king s secret matter." 

But the Cardinal, now so near his fall, considered 
himself the sole and necessary man, and that the safety 
of the Church depended on his election to the Papal 
throne. These are his words : - 

" For the achieving and attaining whereof, forasmuch 
as thereupon dependeth the health and wealth, not only 
of these two princes [Henry VIII. and Francis L] and 
their realms, but of all Christendom, nothing is to 

1 Pocock, Records, ii. 593. 


be omitted that may conduce to the said end and 

As the king gave instructions for bribery, so the 
Cardinal "Wolsey, to his everlasting shame, directed Dr. 
Gardiner to strain every nerve to obtain his election, to 
spend money without stint, and to make promises ; he 
had full powers to treat with every one, and the Cardinal s 
word that the Cardinal and the king would ratify what 
ever he might do. 1 

It is most improbable that the instructions sent to the 
ambassadors by the king were not shown to Cardinal 
Wolsey. Perhaps the truth is that they were his work. 
In those instructions the ambassadors were told that "if 
the election cannot be had in the person of the said lord 
Legate of York," the French Cardinals, " knit together 
to the king s devotion, . . . must be instructed before 
hand " to persist in pressing the election of the Cardinal; 
but if they saw no hope of succeeding, they were then 
to make a protest against the election of any other, 
" which protestation " was to be " couched and devysed" 
by the king s ambassadors. 

" And thereupon the Cardinals of the king s, 2 and the 
French king s adherents, to depart the conclave, whereby 
repairing to some other place, they, with the residue of 
the Cardinals absent, may proceed to such an election 
as may be to God s pleasure, the weal of His Church 
and faith, and of all Christendom, any election that 

1 The letter of Cardinal Wolsey accurate copy is to be found in Mr. 

to Dr. Gardiner was published by Poccc ks Records, ii. 607. 

Foxe, Acts and Monuments, iv. 600, 2 In Harpsfield, Treatise of Mar- 

ed. Cattley ; by Fiddes, Life of Wol- riage, bk. ii. p. 1 19, Eyston MS., the- 

sey, Collections, p. 169 ; but a more reading is " king s side." 


thus by pertinacity may ensue at Kome notwith 
standing." 1 

Upon this Harpsfield 2 observes, with perfect justice, 
as follows : 

" Touching the said Cardinal, we have declared before 
what fervent suit the king made to have made him Pope, 
being ready to rear a schism in the whole Church, and to 
set up an antipope against the true Pope, rather than 
he would have been defeated of his purpose. And all 
was by his authority, being once made Pope, to bring 
to effect the divorce that he so long sought for." 

The king s resolve to create a schism seems to have 
been no secret, for the emperor, in a letter written at 
Toledo, February 16, 1529, expresses his sorrow at the 
news of the Pope s illness, and adds, " His death might 
create a schism in Christendom." 3 

But the illness of the Pope passed away, and Henry 
had to struggle for his ends by another way than that of 
a schism in Europe. 

. When at last he saw that the Pope could be neither 
frightened nor deceived, and that there was nothing 
more to be done but go to trial before the Legates, he 
submitted to his lot. The Legates held their court, and 
proceeded ex officio against him and the queen, whom 
they charged with living disorderly, contrary to the laws 
of Holy Church. The articles thus objected the king 
would have gladly confessed to be true, for he wished to 
be rid of his wife : the queen refused to answer them, 
declining the jurisdiction of the Legates, and appealing 
to the sovereign Pontiff. 

1 Pocock, Kecords, ii. p. 598. 3 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, 

2 Treatise of Marriage, bk. iii. 121. iv. pt. iii. 5301. 


Now, the acts and words of Henry after the queen 
had refused to submit the validity of her marriage to be 
determined in the court of the Legates, show most clearly 
that the Pope had made him no promise to confirm the 
sentence of the Legates, or to allow the question to be 
finally settled in London. For as soon as the queen 
appealed, the king ordered his agents in Eome to do their 
utmost to hinder the appeal from being admitted, and to 
persuade the Pope not to call the cause up before him 
self. The Pope had granted nothing to the king by 
which the legal rights of the queen might be hurt, and 
it was now plain to all that the efforts of the king and 
his ministers for nearly two years had been thrown away. 
Henry VIII. found the law in his path ; the Pope was 
an impartial judge, who would not at his request deprive 
the queen of her right, or of the weapons of defence 
which were allowed by law. Even admitting the Decretal 
Commission about which so much has been said, and the 
" pollicitation " itself, Henry knew that these instruments 
were of no force whatever to stop the course of law. 
The queen had appealed to the Pope, and there was 
end to all the intrigues, devices, and tricks of the king s 
agents, for the Pope neither would nor could refuse 
justice to the meanest of his children. So when the 
king s agents in Kome were striving to persuade the Pope 
to turn a deaf ear to the cry of the insulted queen, they 
were honest enough to write home to the Cardinal of 
York that the Pope could not in justice reject the 
appeal. 1 

1 Letter of Bennet, Casali, and tifex ex justitia hanc advocationem 
Vannes, Pocock, Records of the Re- non posse cuiquam, nedum csesar- 
formation, i. p. 259. "Asserit Port- ianis a Se denegari." 


The king wished much to delay the admission of the 
queen s appeal, for he hoped to hurry the cause in Eng 
land before the Legates, and obtain a sentence in his 
favour. If he could have prevailed upon Cardinal Cam- 
peggio to proceed, and pronounce sentence, which he 
might have done according to law, it was believed that 
the king intended to marry Anne Boleyn at once, though 
he knew, as everybody else did, that the sentence of ithe 
Legates was not, and could not be, a final decision in the 

The Legates did not pronounce any sentence; they 
did not hurry the process, indeed they could not, for 
they had to receive and consider the depositions of many 
witnesses ; and then there were the peremptory orders of 
the Pope, that they must not, for he would not open a 
door for the king to sin. The cause had been a trouble 
to the Pope for some two years, but he never once put 
any difficulty in the way of ending it. All the delay 
arose out of the king s demands, almost always unjust, 
and the time that was wasted was wasted in listening to 
these demands, which after all could not be, and were 
not, granted. 

Clement VII. always said that as Henry VIII. had 
rendered great services to the Holy See, he considered 
himself bound to do him all the kindness he could. He 
did so ; he was patient with him, forbearing and gener 
ous in all his dealings with him. He bore too with the 
Cardinal of York, and seems to have refused him nothing 
that he asked for in the way of favours and graces. But 
in all his doings he never trenched upon justice, and 
never gave away the rights of a third person ; he was 


perfectly immovable whenever the rights of another 
were touched. 

When Henry pleaded his conscience, and said that he 
was convinced his marriage was unlawful, though he 
would not take the necessary measures to obtain the 
decision of his doubts, or the confirmation of his belief, 
the Pope readily admitted the value of his learning and 
the sincerity of his convictions, but he could not help 
him, because the queen s convictions were entitled to 
equal consideration, and the law must be administered 
without respect of persons. 

The scruples of the king were not realities, for when 
Cardinal Campeggio offered to obtain a fresh dispensation 
and a declaration on the part of His Holiness that the 
marriage was perfectly valid and lawful, Henry VIII. 
declined the remedy. 1 He was convinced that the mar 
riage was void, and that the Pope had not the power to 
make it good. 

But his belief in the unlawfulness of the marriage was 
also pretended, for he was told of an easy way out of his 
troubles. Gregorio Casali, January 13, 1 5 28, 2 reported 
a conversation he had had with the Pope to Cardinal 
Wolsey. Clement VII., according to the writer, sug 
gested a way by which the dispute could be settled with 
out any delay. It was this : " the king is troubled in 
mind, but if his conscience tells him his marriage is null, 
and that he can lawfully do that which he wishes to do 
there is no doctor in the world who can see into that 
so clearly as the king let him begin the process, marry 
a wife, and demand sentence." 

1 Theiner, p. 572. 2 Burnet, Hist. Reform., iv. p. 41, 

ed. Pocock. 


Now if the king was so convinced of the goodness of 
his cause, the remedy suggested by His Holiness was the 
simplest and the easiest. There could be no delay in 
the process, for both he and the queen, and his new wife 
so married, would have pressed the matter on, and the 
suit might have been brought to a close in a few months, 
or perhaps weeks, for the Pope promised to pronounce 
the sentence at once. " Statim feretur sententia quam 
Pontifex maturdbit." 

The king did not run the risk ; he preferred, notwith 
standing his convictions and the trouble of his con 
science, to obtain from the Pope, before the trial, a 
definite promise that the sentence should be as he 
wished it to be, in his favour against the queen. 

The Cardinal of York seems to have urged the divorce 
on the sole ground of policy ; he admitted that grave 
divines and lawyers maintained that the Pope could not 
dispense with the impediments that were in the way of 
the king s first marriage, but he does not seem himself 
to have once doubted the perfect lawfulness of that 
marriage, the dissolution of which he had taken upon 
himself to accomplish for ends of his own. 

In the instructions 1 given to Gardiner and Fox when 
they were sent to the Pope to sue for a divorce, the 
Cardinal of York screens himself behind " the greatest 
divines and lawyers." 

" If God," he says, " has given any light of true 
doctrine to the greatest divines and lawyers of this realm, 
and if in this angle of the world there be any hope of 
God s favour, Wolsey is well assured, and dare put his 
soul/ that the king s desire is grounded upon justice." 

1 Letters and Papers, ed. Brewer, iv. pt. ii. 3913. 


He may, certainly, have persuaded himself that the 
Pope could not make that marriage good, but it is most 
improbable, and his conduct throughout is at least a pro 
fession that he fully believed in the powers of the Pope. 
But the unutterable meanness of all ambitious men broke 
out, and in these very instructions the Cardinal of York, 
knowing all that he knew, and knowing also, as all others 
knew, that the raising up of Anne Boleyn to the royal 
throne would be his ruin, thus continues : 

"On the other side the approved excellent virtuous 
qualities of the said gentlewoman, the purity of her life, 
her constant virginity, her maidenly and womanly pudi- 
city, her soberness, chasteness, meekness, humility, wis 
dom, descent of right noble and high thorough regal 
blood, education in all good and laudable [qualities] and 
manners, apparent aptness to procreation of children, 
with her other infinite good qualities, more to be re 
garded and esteemed," &c. 

The Cardinal archbishop of York, who knew all that 
passed in the court of Henry VIII. , could write thus of 
the woman then openly coveting the place of the queen, 
and receiving those coarse and filthy letters of her adul 
terous lover, which no one has ever ventured to defend. 

This account of Anne Boleyn given by the Cardinal 
was not forgotten by the king, for in the year 1533, 
when he sent Sir William Paget to justify and explain 
his conduct to the princes of Germany, he inserted it 
nearly word for word in the instructions of his minister, 
to the praise of " his lawful wife, the noble lady, dame 
Anne marques of Pembroke. 

55 1 

1 Burnet, Hist. Keform., vi. p. 9. 


Neither the king nor the Cardinal went willingly to 
the trial; they had been both disappointed, for they had 
hoped to force or deceive the Pope to be their accom 
plice in a grievous wrong. Clement VII. and the Cardi 
nals whom he consulted never swerved aside, threats 
and flatteries were equally powerless to move them, and 
the Pope, sorely troubled and without material succours, 
stood immovable ; his duty, he said, was to see that 
" the See Apostolic be not slandered," and throughout 
this most shameful process the See Apostolic was not 

The writer s thanks are due to many who have given 
him the benefit of their learning and advice, but especially 
to Charles J. Eyston of Hendred House, Esq., for the use 
of his MSS., particularly the Treatise of Archdeacon 
Harpsfield on Marriage, from which so many extracts 
will be found, not only in this introduction, but also 
among the notes ; and to the Eeverend the Father Law, 
of the London Oratory, whose constant help and prudent 
counsel, with his patient labour in reading the sheets as 
they came out of the printer s hands, have made this 
translation of Dr. Sander s work less imperfect than it 
otherwise must have been. 

D. L. 

March 27, 1877. 





ON my arrival in France, whither I was lately banished 
out of an English prison, I understood from the conver 
sation of many people that the works of Dr. Sander, 
because of the high esteem in which the learned held 
them, were everywhere sought after by the printers for 
the purpose of publication, more especially those which 
had not been hitherto printed, but which that saintly 
man, too soon taken from us by death, had either left 
in the care of friends or retained himself. Of these, I 
was told that a work on Justification in seven books 
was at that time in the press at Trier, 1 and that some 
other writings of the same author were sought after, 
but above all a certain remarkable book on the begin 
ning and growth of the Anglican Schism; of which 
there were copies extant in manuscript though very 
few in Italy as well as in Spain, where he finished the 
book, bringing the history down to his own day. 

This work on the Anglican Schism, divided into three 
books, but not perfectly finished to the satisfaction of 
the author, owing to his other occupations and his 
other writings, was left behind by Dr. Sander when, in 

1 De Justifications contra Col- Lutheranorum dissidiis circa Justifi. 
loquium Altemburgense, sive de cationem. August. Treviroruni, 1585- 



liis great zeal for souls, lie went from Spain to Ireland 
to help the afflicted Catholics who in that country 
were fighting for the faith. He was not long there, for 
continual labour and hunger, the unhealthiness of the 
climate, the utter absence of all the necessaries of life, 
with other hardships and anxieties, weighed him down, 
and he resigned his saintly soul into the hands of Him 
who made him. 1 

Last year in Paris, after my return from England, I 
met a very old friend, Jodocus Skarnkert of Cologne, 
whom I had known also in Eome, and as we were both 
of us interested in ecclesiastical history, we often spoke 
of such books as this. My friend very earnestly pressed 
me to give him a copy of this work of Dr. Sander, he 
knew I had read it, and believed that I possessed a copy. 
He added that if I did so, I should not only give a very 
great pleasure to himself and his friend the bookseller, 
but render also no slight service to the whole of Christen 
dom ; for it is impossible, he said, for people not to learn 
a most profitable lesson he knew something of the con 
tents of the books from a record of the deeds of the 
heretics and schismatics. 

I began by refusing his request, alleging as the reason 
that I had not a copy of the book, and that it could not 
be easily found. Then I doubted whether it would be 
wise to print the book, while they, for the most part, 
were still living whose actions are recorded, and whose 
foul deeds are brought to light. He, however, insisted 
on it that the public good was to be preferred to the 

1 In the margin are these words : " Mors Sanderi in Hibernia an. 


advantage of private persons, and that there was no 
hope now of their ever becoming better men, seeing that 
they are daily adding sin to sin ; that the author himself 
would have published it some years ago, if he had not 
been hindered, first by his occupations, and then by 
death; that copies of it were abroad, and it was 
certain that before long some one would publish the 
book, and perhaps incorrectly, unless some Englishman 
undertook the charge of it. He said that no one could 
do that better than I could, who had some experience 
in such matters, and that it would not be difficult for 
me, who for nearly four years had observed those 
things that were done in prison in London, to add, 
in the reign of Elizabeth, all that took place in England 
after the death of Dr. Sander. 

Yielding to these and other reasons, I promised Dr. 
Jodocus to do all I could, and exerted myself forthwith 
to obtain a copy by the help of my friends, and suc 
ceeded without much difficulty. Then I read the whole 
book through, correcting certain passages which were 
faulty, either because the transcribers were careless, or 
not clearly expressed because the author was in a 
hurry. I have also left out some of the discussions 
which seemed tedious, in order to preserve more closely 
the order of the story, adding much, especially those 
things that took place after the death of Dr. Sander. 
And as the whole work is not very long, I included it 
all in one volume, and sent it thus corrected, together 
with this letter to my friend Dr. Jodocus, to be trans 
mitted by him to the bookseller who so much wished 
to have it, with the single request that he would have 


it correctly printed, which. I hope will be done ; if not, 
my goodwill at least has not been wanting, and I trust 
that the charitable reader will think so. 

I pray God of His goodness to grant that the Chris 
tian world may gather all the fruit I desire from this 
admirable history, and learn to hate heresy and schism. 
Friendly reader, farewell ; and pray unto God for me. 


THE Britons are said to have been first converted to 
the faith of Christ by Joseph of Arimathia, then con 
firmed therein by Eleutherus, the Koman Pontiff the 
twelfth in succession from Peter who sent to them 
Fugatius and Damian, by whom Lucius king of 
Britain and a very large number of the people were 
baptized, so that Tertullian, 1 who lived so near to their 
times, wrote, "Countries of the Britons which no 
Koman ever trod are subject unto Christ." But when 
the Angles and the Saxons from Germany had overcome 
the Britons in war, and hemmed them in in the more 
distant part of the island, Gregory the Great sent to 
those very Saxons Augustin, Mellitus, and others, 
monks of St. Benedict, who made Christian a nation 
hitherto given to idols, and baptized Ethelbert king of 
Kent. 2 

From that day almost to the twenty-fifth year of the 
reign of Henry VIII., 3 for about a thousand years, none 
other than the Eoman Catholic faith prevailed in 
England, insomuch that the very kingdom, from the 
days of king Ina to those of Henry VIII. , for nearly 

1 Adversus Judseos, c. 7. " Et l A.D. 596. 
Britannorum inaccessa Komanis loca, 3 A.D. 1533-1 534. 
Ohristo vero subdita." 



eight hundred years, paid by way of tribute a penny 
for every house to the Eoman Pontiff, in honour of St. 
Peter; the which tribute was commonly called Peter s 
pence. But Henry VIII., solely for the reasons I am 
about to set forth, changed the faith of Christ, and 
severed the realm of England from the communion of 
the Eoman Pontiff. 

Arthur, the elder brother of Henry, married to 
Catherine, the daughter of the Catholic sovereigns of 
Spain, not only died without issue, but more than that, 
on account of his sickly youth, and because of his death, 
which soon ensued, never lived with his wife. There 
upon Henry, by Papal dispensation, for the preservation 
of peace between the Spaniards and the English, took 
Catherine for his wife, and having lived with her for 
some twenty years, put her away, seemingly, because 
she had been married to his brother, but in truth that 
he might put Anne Boleyn in her place, who was more 
nearly related to him, for she was the sister of one, and 
the daughter of another woman, both then alive, with 
whom Henry had been living in sin ; besides, she was 
considered, not without many good reasons, to be 
Henry s own child. 

Henry then, in order to marry this woman, put away 
Catherine, and apostatised from the Eoman Church. 
He did not enter any other older Church, nor did he go 
to that of the Lutherans and Calvinists, newly begun, 
but he set up a new Church, of which he called himself 
the supreme head on earth. Anne Boleyn had sinned 
with many before marriage, and after her marriage with 
the king she sinned with her own brother. She was 

PREFACE. Cxlvii 

always a Lutheran. In the end she was found guilty of 
adultery and incest, Thomas Boleyn, her reputed father, 
being one of the judges, and Henry had her put to 

The hypocrisy then of the king, pretending the fear 
of God when he put Catherine away ; the incestuous 
marriage with Anne Boleyn, I say incestuous marriage 
of Henry, for if Anne was not his own child, she was 
the child of his mistress ; the incest also of Anne Boleyn 
with her own brother; the ecclesiastical supremacy of 
the king, which Henry was the first to assume, are the 
foundations on which that religion is built and stands, 
which England held and professed under Henry, 
Edward, and Elizabeth. And yet that which Henry 
set up in matters of belief, after the divorce, when he 
had himself styled supreme head of the Church, was 
by his children, Edward and Elizabeth, overthrown and 
utterly destroyed, for they brought in another gospel 
altogether, and put it in the place of that which Henry 
had founded. 

The marvellous and amazing things that God wrought 
in that kingdom, after the beginning of the schism, for 
the purpose of bringing back the hearts of the children 
to the faith of their fathers, can never be thoroughly 
understood without a history of the schism ; that history, 
strange and surprising, I shall now tell in all sincerity 
as I have gathered it either from public records or from 
the testimony, oral and written, of men of the greatest 
consideration, or at least from my own knowledge and 





WHEN the Empire was governed by Maximilian, 1 Spain 
by Ferdinand 2 and Isabella the Catholic, England by 
Henry VII., 3 the state of Christendom was to all ap 
pearance singularly prosperous ; for both in peace and 
war no one was more distinguished than the emperor 
Maximilian, or more successful than the Catholic sove 
reigns : no one was more valiant or more prudent than 
Henry VII., who, victorious in all his wars, abounded 
in all manner of riches. 

Divisions were creeping in among the Mahometans, 
for Ismael Sophi, whose mother was a daughter of 

1 Maximilian I., born March. 22, came king of Castille in right of his 
1459 j elected king of the Romans, wife Isabella, daughter of John II., 
Feb. 1 6, 1486 ; crowned April 10 of king of Castille. Isabella was born 
the same year ; acknowledged as April 23, 1451, and died Nov. 26, 
emperor on the death of his father, 1504, before her husband, who, as 
which took place Aug. 19, 1493. He king of Aragon, died Jan. 23, 1516. 
was never crowned, and remained 3 Henry VII. became king Aug. 
emperor- elect, dying Jan. 12, 1519. 22, 1485, and died in the twenty- 

2 Ferdinand, son of John II., fourth year of his reign, April 21, 
king of Navarre and Aragon, be- 1509. 


Hassoun Cassan, put forth a new explanation of Islam, 
and the people were the more ready to accept it because 
he had made himself king of Persia. The Saracens, 
who had held Andalucia for nearly eight hundred years, 
were driven out of Spain. The new world, opened to 
the Christian kings in the infinite compassion of God, 
had begun to obey the Gospel : the Portuguese carrying- 
it towards the south, and the Spaniards towards the 
west, together with the renown of their respective 
nations, by authority of the Pope, Alexander VI. 1 

While matters were thus happily ordered, a treaty was 
made, in the year of our Lord s Incarnation 1500, 
between the most mighty princes, Henry VII. of 
England of the one part, and Ferdinand and Isabella 
of Spain of the other part, for the marriage of Arthur, 
the eldest son of Henry VII. , and Catherine, the well- 
dowered daughter of the Catholic sovereigns. The 
treaty was carried into effect in the following year, and 
the marriage was solemnised in London, in the church 
of St. Paul, November I4th, a day in England kept in 
honour of St. Erconwald. That night the princes were 
conducted with ceremonious observances to the bridal 
chamber, attended by a grave matron, who remained 
with them, 2 by order of Henry VII., acting on the ad 
vice of the physicians ; for prince Arthur, hardly arrived 
at his fifteenth year, was suffering from a lingering 
disease, worn out by which in less than six months he 
departed this life. 3 

1 See the Bull Inter ccetera Divince cipe Arthur, no consunimaron el 
Majestati, dated May 4, 1 493. matrimonio." 

2 Mr. Pocock, Kecords of the Ee- 3 Arthur was born Sept. 20, 1486 
formation, ii. p. 426, has published he was therefore fifteen years old and 
a letter of king Ferdinand, written nearly seven weeks when he married 
at Barcelona, Aug. 23, 1503, in which Catherine. He died in Ludlow 
the same account is given : " La dicha Castle, where he lived as prince of 
princesa, nuestra hija queclo entera, Wales, April 2, 1502. 

y ahun que se velaron ella y prin- 


When the Catholic sovereigns, on the death of prince 
Arthur, demanded their daughter, Henry VII. made 
them the offer of another marriage for her, and after 
mature consideration the offer was accepted. That offer 
was to this effect, that with the consent of the sove 
reign Pontiff, sought and obtained, Catherine should be 
betrothed to Henry, the brother of prince Arthur, who 
was then in the twelfth year of his age. 1 The proposed 
marriage was first of all discussed at home by learned 
theologians and lawyers of both realms, whether it could 
be made with due regard to public morals ; and then, 
when they were satisfied that the marriage could be 
made lawful, ambassadors were sent from Spain and 
England, first to Alexander VI, and next to Pius III. 
But before the matter could be settled both these Popes 
died. 2 It was then brought before Julius II., who 
having consulted the most learned men, decided that, 
for the sake of preserving peace between two such 
powerful kingdoms, which was a common good, the 
impediment to the marriage, created by human laws, 
and that the only one, had in this case no place, and 
gave his sanction to the marriage. 

The theologians maintained that the divine law re 
corded in the Holy Writings, is so far from forbidding 
such a marriage, that under the law of nature the 
patriarch Judas commanded Onan, his second son, 
to marry Thamar, the widow of his elder brother, who 
had died without issue, that there might be children to 
succeed him. They said, too, that if we look into the 
law of Moses, the same commandment, even under pain 
of dishonour, is laid upon the surviving brother, and it 

1 Henry VIII. was born June 28, name of Pius III. He died within 

1491. a month of his election, Oct. 18, 

12 Alexander VI. died Aug. 18, 1503. Julius II. was elected Nov. 

1503. Francis Cardinal Piccolomini 1,1503. 
was elected Sept. 22, and took the 


never could be that God should not merely allow, but 
even command, the breaking of the natural law in any 
case, certainly not in the state of nature, seeing that He 
had given that law as a gift inseparable from that state, 
yea, even as its rule and guide. 

If any one holds such an opinion, he must hold also 
that God created nature unchangeable, and at the same 
time changed and destroyed it Himself, and therefore 
that He contradicts and denies Himself. It is most 
unseemly to think thus of God, and therefore nothing 
is more certain than that the marriage of one brother 
with the widow of another brother dying without issue 
is in no wise forbidden by the eternal or natural law ; 
but only by positive and ecclesiastical law, from the 
observance of which, on good grounds, a dispensation 
from the Roman Pontiff may be had. 

It is true that the law forbids the marriage with a 
brother s widow, but in this instance the law is inap 
plicable, partly because the marriage of Arthur and 
Catherine was never perfected, partly because, even if 
that were not certain, Arthur was now dead, and besides, 
even if after his death people believed that he and 
Catherine had been really man and wife, the difficulty 
was not of such a nature as not to become insignificant 
when put in the balance against the general advantage 
of peace between the two nations. 

When the theologians had established their opinion 
by most weighty proofs drawn from the Sacred Books 
and from the writings of the Holy Fathers, and when 
not a voice was heard in opposition throughout the 
Church among any people on the face of the earth, 
Henry and Catherine are betrothed, and only betrothed 
because of Henry s youth. 1 

i Henry was twelve years of age and six months when the Brief was 

CHAP. I.] 


Meanwhile, before the marriage took place, Isabella, 
Catherine s mother, died in Spain, and in England 
Henry VII. 1 Henry VIII. , in the eighteenth year of 
his age, handsome and majestic in person, not destitute 
of judgment, and free from all fear of his father s 
authority, who was now dead, made Catherine his wife. 
It is true that he once said he should not marry her ; 2 
but now, on fuller consideration of the matter, and after 
a solemn publication of the Brief of dispensation in the 
presence of the great men of the kingdom, without a 
word of doubt from any one, and according to the 
resolution of his council, the marriage was openly 
solemnised on the 3d day of June I5O9; 3 and on the 
feast of St. John Baptist next following, June 24th, 4 he 
and the queen were crowned together, amidst universal 
rejoicing, in the Benedictine monastery, westward of 
London, in the abbey church of Westminster. 

Henry and Catherine had five children, three sons 

1 Isabella died Nov. 26, 1 504, and 
Henry, April 21, 1509. 

2 According to Lord Herbert, Life 
of Henry VIII., p. 276, " a deposi 
tion of Eichard Fox, bishop of 
Winchester, taken by Dr. Woolrnan, 
April 5 and 6, 1527, was read" in the 
Legatine Court, A.D. 1529. From 
which it appears that the bishop "did 
not remember that Henry VIII. when 
he came to age did expressly con 
sent to or dissent from the intended 
marriage, yet that he did believe 
that a protestation was made in the 
name of Henry VIII." that he would 
not marry Catherine. He also said 
that Catherine was present, but not 
Henry VIII., and that the protesta 
tion was made in Durham House. 
But, nevertheless, the protestation 
produced before the Legates, accord 
ing to Lord Herbert, p. 277, was 
made at Richmond before Fox, the 
bishop of Winchester, by Henry 

himself, and it does not appear 
that Catherine was present or 
knew of it. Burnet has printed it 
among the Eecords, vol. iv. p. 17, 
from the Cotton Library, and Mr. 
Pocock in a note says that he has 
not found it there. It is dated June 
27, 1 505. If a protestation was ever 
made in that form, the bishop of 
Winchester had forgotten it. 

3 Stow, Annales, p. 487. " The 30! 
day of June king Henry in his 
closet at Greenwich married the lady 
Katherine, his first wife, who had 
been late the wife of prince Arthur, 
deceased, and was dispensed with by 
Pope July." 

4 Ibid. "On the morrow, being 
Sunday and Midsummer Day, the 
king and queen were crowned at 
Westminster in most solemn manner 
by the archbishop of Canterbury 
and other assisting." 


and two daughters, of whom the eldest he was called 
Henry died in the ninth month after his birth, 1 and 
as the others also died in their infancy, Mary alone, 
born at Greenwich, February 18, 1516, in the seventh 
year of Henry s reign, was alive when Henry and 
Catherine were dead. 

1 Stow, Annales, p. 488. " On realm. He was named Henry, but 

New-Year s Day, at Richmond, the deceased on the 23d of February 

queen was delivered of a prince, to next following at Richmond, and 

the great rejoicing of the whole was buried at Westminster." 

( 7) 



THERE was some difference in age between Henry and 
Catherine, and a still greater difference in their lives. 
She was older than her husband in years, at the utmost 
five years, but more than a thousand years in character. 
Catherine used to rise at midnight in order to be present 
at matins sung by religious. At five o clock she 
dressed herself, but as quickly as she could, saying that 
the only time wasted was the time spent in dressing. 
She was a member of the third Order of St. Francis, and 
wore the habit thereof under her royal robes. She 
fasted every Friday and Saturday, and on bread and 
water on the eves of our Lady s feasts. She went to 
confession every Wednesday and Friday, and on Sunday 
received communion. She said the office of our Lady 
daily, and was present every morning in church for six 
hours together during the sacred offices. After dinner, 
and in the midst of her maids of honour, she read the 
lives of saints for two hours. That done, she went to 
church, and generally remained there till it was time for 
supper, which was with her a very scanty meal. She 
always prayed on her knees, without a cushion or any 
thing else between them and the pavement. 1 Can any 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, chamber with a window that had a 
Eyston MS., bk. ii. p. 137. " There prospect into the chapel, out of the 
was in the said house of Bugden, a which she might hear divine service. 


one be astonished that so saintly a woman was to be 
tried in a greater fire of tribulation, so that the fragrance 
of her goodness might be the more scattered over the 
Christian world ? 

Meanwhile Henry was giving the reins to his evil 
desires, 1 and living in sin, sometimes with two, some 
times with three of the queen s maids of honour, one of 
whom, Elizabeth Blount, 2 gave birth to a son, whom 
Henry made duke of Eichmond. 3 The king, indeed, 
admired the sanctity of his wife, but followed evil coun 
sels himself. His daughter Mary was brought up in 
kingly splendour, and made princess of the Britons or 
the Welsh, a people by whom the island was first in 
habited, and who gave it the name of Britain. They 
have a language of their own which hardly any English 
man understands. 

The Germans call foreigners Welsh, and so the Anglo- 
Saxons invited over from Germany to defend the 
island, having turned their weapons at last against the 
Britons and subdued them in order to distinguish 
between the Britons and themselves, called the former 

In tins chamber she enclosed her- 1 Stow, Annales, p, 486. " Matter 
self, sequestered from all other com- pertaining to the politic govern- 
pany, a great part of the day and ment of the realm, with the which 
night, and upon her knees used to at the first he could not well endure 
pray, at the said window, leaning to be much troubled, being rather 
upon the stones of the same. There inclined to follow such pleasant pas- 
was [sic] some of her gentlewomen, times as his youthful years did more 
which did curiously mark and observe delight in." 

all her doings, who reported that 2 Elizabeth Blount, daughter of 

oftentimes they found the said stones Sir John Blount, afterwards the wife 

so wet after her departure, as though of Sir Gilbert Talboys. 

it had rained upon them. It was 3 Henry Fitzroy, created earl of 

credibly thought that in the time of Nottingham, duke of Kichmond and 

her prayer she removed the cushions, Somerset, and also lord high ad- 

that ordinarily lay on the same win- miral, A.D. 1525. He died without 

dow, and that the said stones were issue in 1536 ; having had his edu- 

imbrued with the tears of her de- cation directed by Dr. Croke, who 

vout eyes." Hearne, in his glossary was so active in bribing the foreign 

to Peter Langtoft, under the word doctors to pronounce against the 

" saw," gives the passage. validity of Catherine s marriage. 


Welsh, that is, not Germans, but in relation to the 
Germans, strangers and foreigners. The government 
or direction of this province is given only to him who 
is the heir of the reigning sovereign. That which the 
title of Csesar was among the Eomans, of Dauphin 
among the French, is that of prince of Wales among the 

Into Wales, then, which lies on the western side of the 
island, under the care of four bishops, was Mary sent, 
with distinguished councillors and a splendid house 
hold, to control and govern it in her own right. She 
was sought in marriage by the neighbouring kings and 
princes. Among the first was James V., king of Scot 
land ; then the emperor Charles V., who offered to put 
her in possession of Belgium at once. Then Francis I., 
king of France, sought her in marriage for his two 
sons, either for the Dauphin or the duke of Orleans. 
When Henry rejected the suit on account of the youth 
of the princes, king Francis offered himself as her hus 
band ; nor was Henry disinclined, if the emperor should 
not forthwith restore the Pope to his liberty, whom at 
the time he kept prisoner. For the king, if the em 
peror persisted in detaining the Pope in prison, thought 
of giving his daughter in marriage to the French king, 
and of declaring war against Charles. At last Mary 
was certainly betrothed upon certain conditions to the 
eldest son of the king of France, and the betrothal was 
made at Greenwich in England in due form on the 
8th day of October [1527]; and the bishop of Ely 1 went 
over into France, and made an eloquent harangue on the 
subject in the presence of Francis, king of France. 

1 Nicolas West, bom in Putney, by Pope Leo X., and consecrated at 

educated at Eton and King s Col- Lambeth Oct ,7, WS- He incurred 

le^e, Cambridge. He was chaplain the anger of Henry VIII. tor nis 

to queen Catherine and dean of defence of the marriage of queen 

Windsor. Was made bishop of Ely Catherine, and died April 28, 1533. 


Now, how constant and unvarying was the belief and 
confidence prevailing among all Christian princes in the 
validity of the marriage of Henry and Catherine, appears 
plain enough from this; for they would Dot have sought 
their child in marriage so eagerly if she could not have 
become queen of England, and she could have no right 
to the throne unless born in lawful wedlock. Let us 
now return to Henry. 



CATHERINE S life was one of soberness and modesty, that 
of the king one of levity and wantonness. No two 
lives more contrary the one to the other could be found. 
Then the man, hating restraint and given to wanton 
ness, 1 began to grow weary of the grave matron, and 
his dislike of her could not be long hidden from the 
courtiers. Among these was Thomas Wolsey, daring 
and ambitious beyond his fellows, whose life was more 
like that of the king than that of the queen ; seeking 
every opportunity to please the former, ruin the latter, 
and further his own interests. 2 The man, not merely of 
low, but of mean birth, having made his way into the 
court, became one of the royal chaplains, and at last 
almoner, recommended by Richard, bishop of Win 
chester. 3 By-and-by, when the king had made himself 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, esteemed him so highly that his 
bk. iii. p. 113. "I credibly under- estimation and favour put all other 
stand himself [Henry VIIL] was ancient counsellors out of their ac- 
beaten of his own father saying, customed favour. . . . Who wrought 
to Alcocke, bishop of Ely, then pre- so all his matters, that all his en- 
sent and entreating for him, Never deavour was only to satisfy the 
entreat for him, for this child shall king s mind, knowing right well 
be the undoing of England. " that it was the very vein and right 

2 Cavendish, Life of Wolsey, p. course to bring him to high pro- 
80, ed. 1827. "He was most motion. . . . So fast as the other 
earnest and readiest among all the counsellors advised the king to leave 
council to advance the king s only his pleasure, and to attend to the 
will and pleasure, without any re- affairs of his realm, so busily did the 
spect to the case : the king, there- almoner persuade him to the con- 
fore, perceived him to be a meet trary." 

instrument for the accomplishment 3 Eichard Fox was one of the 
of his devised will and pleasure, chief agents of Henry VII. when 
called him more near unto him, and he was earl of Richmond, preparing 




master of Tournai, he accepted the revenues of the 
bishopric l from the hands of the king. Shortly after 
wards he was made a bishop himself; bishop of Lincoln 
first, next of Durham, and then of Winchester also. As 
archbishop of York he held together the two wealthiest 
sees, Winchester and York, and in the end was made 
chancellor of the whole realm. Still more, he was made 
Cardinal, and appointed Legate a latere, with jurisdic 
tion over the whole kingdom. 2 

his way to the throne, and was re- bishop of Tournai, and then returned 
warded by being made keeper of to Calais. 
the Privy Seal, then secretary of 
State, and loaded with ecclesiastical 
benefices. Finally he was raised to 
the see of Exeter, and was conse 
crated April 8, 1487. Translated 

Feb. 8, 1492, by Innocent VIII. to 
Bath and Wells. Two years after 
wards he went from Bath to Dur 
ham, and was bishop of that see 
from Dec. 12, 1494, till he was trans 
lated to Winchester in 1500, the 
temporalities of which see he ob 
tained Oct. 17, 1500, within a fort 
night of the death of Thomas Langton, 
the former bishop, and therefore 
before the Pope could have made 
the translation. He was godfather 
of Henry VIII., founded the College 
of Corpus Christi in Oxford, and 
died Sept. 14, 1528. Koper, Life of 
Sir Thomas More, p. 5, ed. Dublin, 
1765, says that the bishop once gave 
some advice to Sir Thomas More, 
who, not satisfied with it, discussed 
it with Mr. Whitford, then chaplain 
to the bishop of Winchester, and 
afterwards one of the fathers of 
Sion. Mr. Whitford recommended 
Sir Thomas to disregard the bishop s 
counsel, "for my lord," said the 
chaplain, " to serve the king s turn, 
will not hesitate to agree to his own 
father s death." 

1 Stow, Annales, p. 492. "On 
the 2d day of October the king en 
tered the city of Tournai. ... He 
made his almoner, Thomas Wolsey, 

2 Thomas Wolsey was born in 
Ipswich in the year 1471, educated 
at Oxford, and a fellow of Magda 
lene College, having taken the degree 
of B.A. when he was fourteen years 
old. He became one of the chaplains 
of Henry VII., and ever afterwards 
remained in and about the court. 
He was consecrated bishop of Lin 
coln March 26, 1514, by William 
Warham, archbishop of Canterbury. 
In the following July Cardinal Bain- 
bridge died, and Thomas Wolsey 
succeeds him in the see of York. 
The Cardinal died July I4th, and the 
Bull of provision for the Cardinal 
died in Home is dated Sept. i5th 
of that year. On Sept. 7th of this 
year Wolsey is declared Cardinal, 
and his title assigned him, that of 
St. Csecilia, Dec. I3th, and on Christ 
mas Eve he takes the oath as chan 
cellor of Henry VIII. In 1518 he 
receives the see of Bath and Wells 
in commendam, which, however, he 
resigns when he becomes bishop of 
Durham. In 1521 he becomes 
abbot of St. Alban s that is, he 
takes the revenue, for he was a secu 
lar priest. Dec. 30, 1 523, he becomes 
bishop of Durham, but resigns that 
see in 1 529, when he takes possession 
of Winchester, made vacant by the 
death of Richard Fox. his friend and 
patron. Thus he had at once the 
revenues of York and Winchester, 
and those of the abbot of St. Alban s, 


More still, lie had a pension 1 from the French king 
and from the emperor, to say nothing of the wealthy 
abbeys the revenues of which he seized. But what is 
yet more important is this, the king himself was 
utterly in his power, ordering all things at his good 

And as if all this was too little for him, moved by 
Satan, he aimed at the first see in the Church, the 
throne of the sovereign Pontiff. 2 "When the emperor, 
Charles V., saw this, he began to flatter the man, and 
thereby make his folly minister to his own designs ; 
so he wrote to him often, and always with his own 
hand, subscribing himself, " Your son and cousin, 3 
Charles." Moreover, he gave Wolsey great hopes of 
the Papacy whenever Leo X. died, 4 if he could per 
suade the king to enter into a perpetual league with 
the emperor, and to declare war upon the king of 
France. Wolsey performed his part of the bargain 
most readily ; but the emperor was so far from ful 
filling his part that he laboured, to his great praise, to 
secure the election of Adrian VI. Wolsey, thinking it 

besides pensions from the emperor of Paul s, was sent to Koine to make 

and the king of France. On his friends in the behalf of Cardinal 

relinquishment of Durham, the king Wolsey, who was brought into a 

gave the revenues of that see for one vain hope, through the king s favour 

year to Anne Boleyn. Angl. Sacr., and furtherance, to be elected Pope. 

vol. i. p. 782. But Adrian VI. was chosen before 

1 The French pension was twelve Dr. Pace could come to Rome, and 
thousand livres Tournois. That of so that suit was dashed." 

the emperor was three thousand 3 A contemporary Life of Wolsey 

livres, counted in Flemish money, in the Vatican, published by Pocock, 

granted in the year 151^; and Records, ii. 89, contains these words : 

again, in 1520, was increased by "Carolus Caesar din litteras aliter 

two further pensions of five thou- quam manu sua scriptas non dedit, 

sand and two thousand ducats. He in quibus se filium subscribebat." 

also had a pension of ten thousand 4 Leo X. died Dec. I, 1521, and 

ducats from the duke of Milan. Adrian VI. was elected Jan. 9, 1522, 

See Fiddes, Life of Cardinal Wolsey, who dying Sept. 14, 1523, was suc- 

Collections, pp. 12, 43, 46. ceeded by Clement VII., elected 

2 Stow, p. 514. "Pope Leo died Nov. 19, 1523. 
this year, whereupon Dr. Pace, dean 


[BOOK i. 

better to hide his disappointment, waited for Adrian s 
death. But even then, when Adrian died, the emperor 
forgot the Cardinal ; 1 and besides, having made Francis 
a prisoner at the battle of Pavia, 2 and receiving his two 
sons as hostages, he wrote but seldom to the Cardinal ; 
and when he did, the letters were no longer written by 
himself, and ended simply with the word "Charles." 
Wolsey on seeing this did not conceal his rage ; he 
opposed the emperor with all his might, took the side 
of his enemies, and became a thorough partisan of the 
most Christian king. 3 

1 Cardinal Wolsey s instructions 
sent with the approval of the king 
to the king s ambassadors in Eome 
(Burnet, v. p. 289, ed. Pocock) 
show how ready he was to accept 
the Papacy. He says "that the 
mind and intention of the king s 
highness, and of me both, is to put 
our helps and furtherance, as much 
as conveniently may be, that such 
a successor unto him [Adrian VI.] 
may now by the holy College of 
Cardinals be named and elected, 
as may, with God s grace, &c. . . . 
Ye shall understand that the mind 
and entire desire of his highness, 
above all earthly things, is that I 
should attain to the said dignity 
[of Pope]." . . . Then the Cardinal 
tells the agents that they were to 
solicit the Cardinals " by secret 
labours, alleging and declaring unto 
them my poor qualities, and how 
I, having so great experience of the 
causes of Christendom, . . . not 
lacking, thanked be God, either 
substance or liberality to look 
largely upon my friends ; besides, 
the sundry great promotions which 
by election of me should be vacant, 
to be disposed unto such of the said 
cardinals, as by their true and fast 
friendship had deserved the same." 
These agents in Rome, one of them 
being himself a bishop, Clerk of 
Bath and Wells, had " ample 
authority to bind and promise on 

the king s behalf, as well gift of 
promotions, as also as large sums 
of money to as many and such as 
ye shall think convenient." . . . 
Lastly, Wolsey writes himself with 
his own hand to the bishop, that he 
must be " not sparing any reasonable 
offers, which is a thing that amongst 
so many needy persons is more re 
garded, than percase the qualities 
of the person : ye be wise, and ye 
wot what I mean. . . . The king 
willeth you neither to spare his 
authority, or his good money or 

2 The battle of Pavia was fought 
Feb. 25, 1525. 

3 Tyndale, Practice of Prelates, 
p. 321, ed. Parker Soc. "As soon 
as the Pope was taken, the Cardinal 
wrote unto the emperor that he 
should make him Pope. And when 
he had got an answer that pleased 
him not, but according to his de- 
servings toward the emperor, then he 
waxed furious mad, and sought all 
means to displease the emperor, 
and imagined this divorcement be 
tween the king and the queen, and 
wrote sharply unto the emperor 
with menacing letters, that if he 
would not make him Pope, he 
would make such ruffling between 
Christian princes as was not this 
hundred years, to make the emperor 
repent yea, though it should cost the 
whole realm of England." 


Burning with wrath at the emperor s conduct, and 
seeing that the king was becoming more and more 
estranged from Catherine, and that his own ambitious 
temper was extremely offensive to the latter, he resolved 
to bring about the divorce of the king and queen. He 
considered that it would be advantageous to himself, 
not unpleasing to the king, hateful to Catherine, and 
most disagreeable to the emperor to see his aunt 
divorced. 1 He sends for John Longland, 2 the confessor 
of Henry VIII., and tells him how very much he 
thought of the king s salvation. He could not be silent 
any longer about a matter of such grave importance, 
nor did he think it right to speak of it to any one 
before he spoke to the king s confessor, who knew well 
all the secrets of the king. At last he spoke out, saying 
that he did not think the king s marriage was valid, 
and gave many reasons for his opinion. Longland 
thought the man was sincere in what he said, and did 
not venture to contradict him on account of his rank. 
He knew also that a divorce would not be disagreeable 
to the king, and so he answered merely that it was but 
just that a matter of so much importance should not be 
made known to the king by anybody but Wolsey him- 

1 The emperor, in his answer to Tyndale in the foregoing note is 

Clarencieux (Le Grand, iii. 46), not inexact. 

says that the divorce was the work 2 John Longland was educated at 
of Wolsey, " who, out of greed and Magdalene College, Oxford, and be- 
ambition, and because the emperor came one of the prebendaries of 
would not use his army in Italy to Lincoln in 1514. In 1517 he was 
make him Pope by violence ac- dean of Salisbury, and canon of 
cording to the request made by Windsor in April 1519. ^ He was 
Henry VIII., and by him in letters consecrated bishop of Lincoln at 
written by himself and thereby Lambeth May 5, 1521, by the arch- 
satisfy his vanity, ambition, and bishop, William Warham ; and on 
greed, has often boasted that he the death of that prelate, succeeded 
would so embroil the emperor s him as chancellor of Oxford. He 
affairs as to surpass any troubles was with Cranmer at Dunstable 
known for a hundred years, even when the latter, against law, pro- 
at the cost of the ruin of England." nounced the sentence of divorce. 
Thus the information possessed by 



[BOOK i. 

self. "Wolsey undertook to do so; and the king, as 
soon as he saw what he had come to speak about, 
interrupted him and said, " Beware of disturbing settled 
questions." 1 

Three days afterwards 2 Wolsey took Longland with 
him to see the king, but Longland merely begged the 
king to let the matter be examined. Then, as the king 
did not refuse this, "Wolsey broke in and said that 
there was a woman of great beauty and nobleness in 
France, Margaret, sister of the most Christian king, 
formerly married to the duke of Alenon, and a fitting 
bride for the king. " We will speak of this hereafter," 
said Henry ; " now silence is necessary above all things, 
lest the matter be bruited abroad before everything is 
ready, and leave a stain on our honour," for he knew 
well whom he should marry if he could once put queen 
Catherine out of the way. 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise, &c., bk. ii. 
p. 93, says that all this began with 
Cardinal Wolsey, "who first by 
himself, or by John Longland, 
bishop of Lincoln, and the king s 
confessor, put this scruple and doubt 
in his head. At the first hearing 
whereof, the king, somewhat aston 
ished, held his peace awhile, not 
a little marvelling at this matter 
so moved unto him. At length he 
answered thus : Take heed, I be 
seech you, reverend father, and well 
consider what a great and weighty 

enterprise you take now in hand. 
And speaking much in the com 
mendation of his wife, said that his 
marriage was allowed by the most 
learned and virtuous bishops of the 
realms of England and Spain, and 
confirmed also by the Pope s 

2 Polydori Vergil., lib. xxvii. p. 
685. "At triduo post, Volsseus 
incredibili armatus audacia Lin- 
colniensem convenit eumque ducit 
ad regem." 



THE king having obtained a promise of secrecy, gave 
his whole mind to the divorce. He read and re-read, 
and compared together, with certain theologians, those 
passages of Scripture, especially those in Leviticus and 
Deuteronomium, which he thought most to the purpose. 
He also examined minutely the Brief of Julius II. 
issued in confirmation of his marriage with the queen. 
But after spending nearly a year in this secret exami 
nation of the question, he could find nothing for his 
purpose in the sacred writings, not a flaw in the Ponti 
fical Brief. More than this, if he thought he had found 
anything amiss in the Brief of the Pope, he was met by 
another Brief obtained by king Ferdinand, in which 
the matter was more clearly and more distinctly ex 
pressed, 1 and so he and those whom he consulted came 
to the conclusion that the matter could be carried no 

1 The two Briefs have the same there is a letter in the Eecord Office 

elate Dec. 26, 1503 ; and both may of Sylvester de Gigliis, bishop of 

be seen in Burnet, Hist. Kef., iv. 15, Worcester, to Henry VII., in which 

61, ed. Pocock. But it was pre- it is stated that the second Brief was 

tended in England during the trial issued for the consolation of queen 

that the second Brief was a forgery, Isabella, then upon her deathbed, 

and that there was no trace of it to See Letters and Papers, illustrative 

be found in the archives of the State, of the reigns of Richard III. and 

That pretence was a pretence; for a Henry VIL, vol. i. p. 243. Publica- 

copy of it had been brought over to tions of the Master of the Rolls. 
England by order of the Pope, and 


There the question might have been left, a.nd so in 
truth it would have been, if it had not been disturbed, 
partly by Wolsey, who would not allow the matter to 
rest, and partly by the king, who, grown weary of his 
wife, eager to marry Anne Boleyn, and therefore bent 
on having a divorce, allowed himself to be swayed by the 
most trivial reasons in the direction of his wishes. 

It came to pass at this time that there was an em 
bassy from France in England. Mary the princess of 
Wales had been formerly promised in marriage to the 
Dauphin, and now she was sought rather for the duke 
of Orleans, the second son of Francis I. In that embassy 
was the bishop of Tarbes. 1 

Henry then directed Wolsey to let the bishop know 
of the question that had been raised about the marriage, 
not indeed on the part of the king, but by Wolsey as a 
most faithful friend of the French alliance. He was 
also to say that king Henry, if the marriage could be 
set aside, would and of that he had a certain expec 
tation make the sister of the French king his wife. 

Wolsey did as he was bidden, and added that the 
question was one of such a nature that an Englishman 
should not be the first to touch it or bring it forward, 
for no subject could bear the burden of the hatred and 
illwill which he would incur if he impeached the 
marriage of the king, or raised a doubt concerning its 
validity. The best course to take was that he, the bishop 
of Tarbes, interested as he was in the welfare of both 
kingdoms, should, as the ambassador of the king of 
France, undertake the task himself. 

1 Gabriel de Granont was conse- of Bordeaux, and created Cardinal 

crated bishop of Conserans in 1523, June 8, 1530. He became afterwards 

which see he left for that of Tarbes bishop of Poitiers, and in Oct. 1533 

in 1524, and was in England in the was archbishop of Toulouse. He 

year 1527. On the 24th Sept. in the died in the following year. 
year 15 29 he was made archbishop 


The proposal seemed fair to the bishop ; so he took 
the advice of his companions, and before the council, in 
the presence of the king, spoke to this effect : 

" The English and the French are both alike persuaded 
that nothing is more desirable than peace for the two 
kingdoms ; accordingly we have hitherto been settling 
the marriage of the duke of Orleans with her most 
serene highness Mary, princess of Wales, in furtherance 
of the blessing of peace a marriage which, I do not 
doubt, will be to the advantage of both nations. But 
there is another way of attaining the same end, infinitely 
more convenient, were it permitted me to speak of it. 
But why should it not be ? I have to do not only with 
Christian, but also with most excellent and wise men, 
who prefer the public good to any private advantage. 
How much better it would be if a marriage of this kind 
were contracted by grown-up persons rather than by 
children, by the sovereign rulers of their realms rather 
than by princes subject to them in a word, by royal 
persons themselves rather than by their children. As for 
us in France, it is well known that the sister of the most 
Christian king, the duchess of Alengon, is to be had in 
marriage, and that she is not married because she is 
waiting for some one who shall increase and not lessen 
the royal splendour of her house. Now, if in England 
a certain chief personage yea, even the first of all were 
without a wife, why should we not try, to the great 
advantage of both kingdoms, to bring these royal person 
ages together, and bind them in the bonds of wedlock ? 

O O 

" Your serene highness, most mighty king Henry 
and I pronounce your name to do it honour is free from 
the bonds of wedlock in reality if not in appearance, 
not in my opinion only, but in that of almost aH the 
most learned men. For though Catherine be a most 
noble as well as a most saintly woman, I marvel much 


how you can have and keep her as your wife the wife 
once of your brother, whom according to the gospel you 
may not have. I do not doubt at all that the gospel 
which the English, your subjects, believe, is the one 
which we also believe, though they may not speak their 
thoughts about your marriage openly till your highness 
gives them leave to do so. 


" Foreign nations, indeed, have always spoken with 
greater freedom of this marriage, and are very sorry 
that your majesty in your youth was led to make such a 
mistake through the counsel of those whom you trusted. 
Now, if it be true that no man may marry his brother s 
wife, your highness has the best opportunity of throwing 
off as soon as possible the bonds of matrimony in which 
you are now held, and, by placing the sister of the most 
Christian king in the place of Catherine, of establishing 
a firm and lasting peace between these two most noble 
kingdoms. You will think in your wisdom more at 
leisure of this, it being enough for me to have spoken 
with Christian freedom of that which is at once advan 
tageous and honourable." 

Henry feigned both displeasure and astonishment at 
this strange and hitherto unheard-of proposal, but as it 
touched his honour and his eternal salvation, he would 
take time to think of it. The bishop of Tarbes hurried 
back to France that he might be the first to give the 
king tidings, unexpected, of so joyful an event. 

But the English, when they heard of the bishop s 
deed, spoke loudly against the ambassadors of France, 
and blamed in every way the intention of the king ; for 

1 Henry himself, in the presence you," says the king, " the special 

of the Legates, in 1 529, refers to this ; cause that moved me hereunto : it 

but the bishop was the bishop of was a certain scrupulosity that 

Bayonne, Jean du Bellay, unless it pricked my conscience upon divers 

be a mistake of Cavendish, who in words that were spoken at a certain 

his " Life of Wolsey," p. 219, thus re- time by the bishop of Bayonne, the 

lates the fact : " I will declare unto French king s ambassador." 


everybody believed that the affair had been arranged 
and spoken of at his suggestion. 

At this very time news arrived of the capture of Eome 1 
by the Constable de Bourbon 2 he had paid for his perfidy 
with his life and of the sacking and burning of the city. 
The holy places were profaned, the sovereign Pontiff him 
self, Clement VII., besieged, yea, even kept as a prisoner. 

Wolsey takes this opportunity of urging Henry 
VIII. to go to the aid of the Pope, saying that he 
could do nothing less than show himself the Defender 
of the Faith, for the king had lately received for himself 
and his descendants that title from the Apostolic See, 
because he had written a book against the heresies of 
Luther. 3 By helping the Pope, he said to the king, 
that he would lay him under a lasting obligation, wou]d 
find him not only a favourable judge in the matter of 
the divorce, but also his earnest defender; besides, he 
would deserve well of the king of France, and especially 
of his children, whom he would thereby deliver out of 
the hands of Charles V., in whose power they were 
at the time. 

The king was persuaded 4 to send the Cardinal to 

1 The troops of Charles V. entered to grant it, for even on May 22, 1516, 
Eome, May 6, 1527, and for two Cardinal Wolsey complains of the 
months the Holy City was subjected delay to the bishop of Worcester 
to the most grievous pillage and see Martene and Durand, Collect, 
other wickedness of lawless men, Ampliss., vol. iii. col. 1274. The 
most of whom were heretics from book which the king presented to 
Germany ; and among them was the Pope as his own is now generally 
Thomas Cromwell, afterwards the believed to have been the work of 
vicar-general of Henry VIII., who John Fisher, bishop of Rochester, 
thus began his life in murder and 4 According to Cavendish, the 
sacrilege. king sent Wolsey on this embassy 

2 Charles duke of Bourbon, con- by the persuasion of Anne Boleyn a 
stable of France, born Feb. 28. 1489 ; friends, " that they might have con- 
slain before the gates of Rome May venient leisure and opportunity to 
6, 1527. adventure their long-desired enter- 

3 The title, of Defender of the prise, and by the aid of their chief 
Faith was granted to Henry by Leo mistress, my lady Anne, to deprave- 
X. Oct. ii, 1521. It had been asked him so unto the king." P. 148, ed. 
for long before, but for some reasons Singer. 

there seemed to be an unwillingness 


France with, two colleagues, and a sum of eighty 
thousand gold pieces. But besides the general instruc 
tions given alike to the three ambassadors, he gave 
others of a secret nature to Wolsey, which con 
cerned the divorce of the queen, the marriage of the 
duchess of Alencon, and the deliverance of the two 
children of Francis, who were hostages in the hands of 
the emperor. 

Wolsey set out on his journey * joyous and exulting, 
but to his astonishment, while halting in Calais, other 
letters are brought to him from the king. In these 
he is charged to say nothing of the marriage with the 
duchess of Alengon, and to speak only of the other 
matters. The reason of this was that the king had 
made up his mind to marry Anne Boleyn, if he could 
put queen Catherine away. Wolsey was angry, for his 
chief reason in pressing the divorce was that by the 
second marriage he might lay the king of France under 
an obligation, and thereby bind him to his interests. 
Wolsey, indeed, was not ignorant of the king s passion 
for Anne Boleyn, but he never imagined that the king 
meant to marry her ; he persuaded himself that Henry 
would treat her as he had treated her sister and her 
mother before, who never had any expectations of being- 
raised to the throne. 

1 In July 1527. 



ANNE BOLEYN was the daughter of Sir Thomas Boleyn s 
wife ; I say of his wife, because she could not have been 
the daughter of Sir Thomas, 1 for she was born during 
his absence of two years in France on the king s affairs. 2 
Henry VIII. sent him apparently on an honourable 
mission in order to conceal his own criminal conduct; 
but when Thomas Boleyn, on his return at the end of 
two years, saw that a child had been born in his house, 
he resolved, eager to punish the sin, to prosecute his 
wife before the delegates of the archbishop of Canter 
bury, and obtain a separation from her. His wife 
informs the king, who sends the marquis of Dorset 3 
with an order to Thomas Boleyn to refrain from prose 
cuting his wife, to forgive her, and be reconciled to her. 

1 Sir Thomas Boleyn or Bullen 
was made viscount Rochford, June 
18, 1525 ; earl of Wiltshire in Eng 
land, and earl of Onnond in Ireland, 
Dec. 8, 1529. He died in 1538, 
having seen the dishonoured rise and 
the disgraceful ruin of his family. 

2 " In Francia legatum agente." 
Acting as ambassador, but not ne 
cessarily an ambassador ; and the 
document, printed for the first time 
by Mr. Pocock, Records of the Refor 
mation, ii. p. 573, agreeing substan 
tially with this history, has the 
words : "A ce fois aux garres en 
France pourle roy." Here in the mar 
gin of the original is a note in these 

words : " Hsec narrantur a Gulielmo 
Rastallo,judice,invita Thomse Mori." 
William Rastall was a nephew of 
Sir Thomas More, and in the reign 
of Mary one of the puisne judges of 
the King s Bench. 

a Thomas Grey, son of the first 
marquis of Dorset, and the father of 
Henry Grey, who was made duke 
of Suffolk. This duke of Suffolk 
married Frances, daughter of Charles 
Brandon, duke of Suffolk, and of 
Mary, sister of Henry VIII. Thomas 
Grey died in 1530, and all the 
honours of his family were forfeited 
by his eldest son, the duke of Suf 


Sir Thomas Boleyn saw that he must not provoke 
the king s wrath, nevertheless he did not yield obedi 
ence to his orders before he learned from his wife that 
it was the king who had tempted her to sin, and that 
the child Anne was the daughter of no other than Henry 
VIII. His wife then entreated him on her knees to 
forgive her, promising better behaviour in the future. 
The marquis of Dorset and other personages, in their 
own and in the king s name, made the same request, 
and then Sir Thomas Boleyn became reconciled to his 
wife, and had Anne brought up as his own child. 

But his wife had borne Sir Thomas another daughter 
before this one, named Mary. Upon her the king had 
cast his eyes when he used to visit her mother, and 
now, after the return of Sir Thomas, he had her brought 
to the court, and ruined her. The royal household con 
sisted of men utterly abandoned gamblers, adulterers, 
panders, swindlers, false swearers, blasphemers, extor 
tioners, and even heretics ; among these was one distin 
guished profligate, Sir Francis Bryan, 1 of the blood and 
race of the Boleyn. This man was once asked by the 
king to tell him what sort of a sin it was to ruin the 
mother and then the child. Bryan replied that it was 
a sin like that of eating a hen first and its chicken 
afterwards. The king burst forth into loud laughter, and 
said to Bryan, Well, you certainly are my vicar of hell." 
The man had been long ago called the vicar of hell on 
account of his notorious impiety, henceforth he was 
called also the king s vicar of hell. The king, who had 
sinned before with the mother and the elder daughter, 
turned his thoughts now to the other daughter, Anne. 

1 His office at court was master qu avec cet apuy, il ne manqueroit pas 

of the king s henchmen, i.e., the de s elever, et on le considera pend- 

king s pages. Le Grand (Histoire ant quelque terns comme un favory 

du Divorce, i. p. 79) thus writes of naissant, mais il ne put se soutenir. 

him : "Neveu de Norfolc, et cousin II ainioit a boire et etoit fort suiet a 

germain d Anne de Boulen. On crut mentir." 


Anne Boleyn was rather tall of stature, with black 
hair, and an oval face of a sallow complexion, 1 as if 
troubled with jaundice. She had a projecting tooth 
under the upper lip, and on her right hand six fingers. 2 
There was a large wen under her chin, and therefore 
to hide its ugliness she wore a high dress covering her 
throat. In this she was followed by the ladies of the 
court, who also wore high dresses, having before been 
in the habit of leaving their necks and the upper 
portion of their persons uncovered. She was handsome 
to look at, with a pretty mouth, amusing in her ways, 
playing well on the lute, and was a good dancer. She 
was the model and the mirror of those who were at 
court, for she was always well dressed, and every day 
made some change in the fashion of her garments. But 
as to the disposition of her mind, she was full of pride, 
ambition, envy, and impurity. 

At fifteen she sinned first with her father s butler, 
and then with his chaplain, and forthwith was sent to 
France, and placed, at the expense of the king, under 
the care of a certain nobleman not far from Brie. 3 
Soon afterwards she appeared at the French court, 
where she was called the English mare, because of her 

1 " Colore subflavo." Simon Gry- " There was found, indeed, upon 
naeus, quoted below, says she was the side of her nail, upon one of her 
"fuscula," and George Wyatt seems fingers, some little show of a nail, 
to admit the fact, when he says in which yet was so small, by the 
the passage, part of which is given report of those that have seen her, 
in the following note, " She was as the workmaster seemed to leave 
taken at that time to have a beauty it an occasion of greater grace to her 
not so whitely as clear and fresh hand, which with the tip of one of 
above all we may esteem, which her other fingers might be and was 
appeared much more excellent by usually by her hidden without any 
her favour passing sweet and cheer- least blemish to it. Likewise there 
ful." were said to be upon some parts of 

2 Mr. Singer, in his edition of her body certain small moles inci- 
Cavendish, has printed a memoir dent to the clearest complexions/ 
of Anne Boleyn by George Wyatt, 3 Blackwood (Martyre de la Royne 
the grandson of Sir Thomas Wyatt, d Ecosse, p. 7. Anvers, 1588) says 
mentioned in this history, who ad- that the nobleman was a friend of 
mits this deformity in the following Sir Thomas Boleyn :_ " Amy de ce 
cautious and inconsistent terms : pere putatif." 


shameless behaviour; and then the royal mule, when 
she became acquainted with the king of France. She 
embraced the heresy of Luther to make her life and 
opinions consistent, 1 but nevertheless did not cease to 
hear mass with the Catholics, for that was wrung from 
her by the custom of the king and the necessities of 
her own ambition. 

On her return to England she was taken into the 
royal household, and there easily saw that the king 
was tired of his wife. She also detected the aims of 
Wolsey, how much the king was in love with herself, 
and how quickly he changed in his lawless affections. 
Not to speak of strangers to her family, she saw how 
her mother first, and then her sister, had been discarded 
by the king. What was she, then, to hope for in the 
end if she did not take care of herself at first ? She 
made up her mind what to do. The more the king 
sought her, the more she avoided him, sanctimoniously 
saying that nobody but her husband should find her 
alone ; nevertheless she did not think there was any 
want of modesty in talking, playing, and even in 
dancing with the king. In this way she so fed the 
fires of the king s passion that he became more and 
more determined to put away Catherine his wife, and 
to put a woman of such admirable modesty in her 
place. 2 The news was carried over into France, and 
there it became a common report that the king of 
England was going to marry the mule of the king of 

1 Sleidan, bk. ix. p. 170, Bohun s they may probably be brought up 
Trans. in private, which, if I am not mis- 

2 The author is more generous to taken, I have heard more than once, 
Anne Boleyn than the Protestants though there are those who posi- 
were who strove to advance her. tively deny that the king has any 
Simon Grynaeus, an agent of the intercourse with her, which in my 
king, thus writes to Bucer (Original opinion is not at all likely. But 
Letters, ed. Parker Society, Letter she is young, good-looking, of a 
cclvi.) : " Whether she has children rather dark complexion, and likely 
by the king I do not know. She enough to have children." 

has not any acknowledged as such : 




THOMAS BOLEYN, the reputed father of Anne, was at 
that time in France, detained there on the king s 
business with Sir Antony Brown. 1 But when he heard 
that the king was in love with his daughter, and 
wished to make her queen, he returned to England in 
great haste, and without the king s knowledge, thereby 
departing from the custom observed by ambassadors, to 
let the king know, while it was yet time, that which 
might prove hurtful to himself hereafter, if the king 
ever heard it from others. He applied himself to Henry 
Norris, 2 one of the king s chamberlains, begging him to 
make his excuses to the king for his unexpected return, 
and to obtain for him a secret audience. 

Sir Thomas then, having obtained the audience, told 
the king everything ; how Anne was born when he was 
in France, and how he for that reason would have sent 
his wife away if he, the king, had not interfered, and 
if his wife had not confessed without hesitation that 
Anne Boleyn was the king s child. Henry replied, 
"Hold your tongue, you fool, hundreds are compro 
mised ; and be her father who he may, she shall be my 
wife. Go back to your embassy, and do not say a word 

1 He was master of the horse to 2 Groom of the stole, executed 
Henry. A.D. 1536. 


of this." The king went away laughing, Sir Thomas 
being still on his knees. 

To lessen men s surprise at the sudden arrival of Sir 
Thomas Boleyn, a report was spread abroad that he was 
the bearer of the picture of the duchess of Alencon to 
the king. 1 But afterwards, when Sir Thomas saw that 
the king was bent on marrying Anne, both he and his 
wife took every pains and trouble to help Anne, that 
they might not, by some mistake or other, miss the 
good fortune they expected. On the other hand, 
throughout England, every man of sense, modesty, and 
honour every man who feared God, hated exceedingly 
the divorce of the queen and the marriage of Anne. 
Above all others, the members of the king s council 
thought it their duty to warn him. And as they would 
not meddle with questions of the divine law, for they 
were laymen, they resolved to speak only of Anne s 
licentious life, or rather of her reputation, which was of 
the worst ; and that it might not be thought that they 
were influenced by idle rumours, they agreed that the 
whole matter should be investigated. 

Among the courtiers was Thomas Wyatt, who being 
afraid, if the king discovered afterwards how shameless 
Anne s life had been, that his own life might be im 
perilled, went before the council, for his conscience 
accused him grievously, as soon as he knew it to be 
assembled for the purpose, and confessed that he had 
sinned with Anne Boleyn, not imagining that the king 
would ever make her his wife. 

The council, furnished with this information, said that 

1 Stow, p. 530. "There arose the king should sue a divorce and 

about this time a brute in London marry the dutchesse of Alanson, 

that divers great clerks had told the sister to the French king : the town 

king that the marriage between of Calais this sommer, and there- 

liim and the lady Katherine, some- upon viscount Rocheford had 

time wife to his brother, prince brought with him the picture of 

Arthur, was not lawful. Whereupon the same lady." 


it was its duty to watch over not only the life, but also 
the honour and good name of the king ; adding that 
Anne Boleyn was stained in her reputation, and that, 
moreover, so publicly as to make it unseemly in his 
majesty to take her as his wife. It also told the king 
all that Wyatt had confessed. 

Henry was silent for awhile, and then spoke. He 
had no doubt, he said, that the council, in saying these 
things, was influenced by its respect and affection for 
his person, but he certainly believed that these stories 
were the inventions of wicked men, and that he could 
affirm upon oath that Anne Boleyn was a woman of the 
purest life. Thomas Wyatt was very angry when he 
heard that the king would not believe him, and so he 
said to some of the members of the council that he would 
put it in the king s power to see with his own eyes the 
truth of his story, if he would but consent to test it, for 
Anne Boleyn was passionately in love with Wyatt. 1 

Charles Brandon, 2 the duke of Suffolk, repeated the 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. iii. p. 87. " Sir Thomas Wyatt 
the elder, understanding that the 
king minded to marry her, came to 
him and said, Sire, I pray your 
grace pardon me, both of my offence 
and my boldness. I am come to 
your grace of myself to discover 
and utter my own shame. But yet 
my most bounden duty and loyalty 
that I owe to your grace, and the 
careful tendering of your honour 
more than of my own honesty, 
forceth me to do this. Sire, I am 
credibly informed that your grace 
intendeth to take to your wife the 
said lady Anne Bulleyne, wherein 
I beseech your grace" to be well 
advised what you do, for she is not 
meet to be coupled with your grace, 
her conversation hath been so loose 
and base, which thing I know, not 
so much by hearsay, as by my own 
experience, as one that have had 
my carnal pleasure with her. At 
the hearing of this the king, for a 

while being something astonied, 
said to him, Wyatt, thou hast done 
like an honest man, yet I charge 
thee to make no more words of this 
to any man living! This story 
have I heard the right worshipful 
merchant, Mr. Anthony Bonvise, 
rehearse ; which thing he heard of 
them that were men very likely to 
know the truth thereof." 

Dr. Nott (Surrey and Wyatt, ii. 
p. xviii.) says "the story is too 
absurd to need refutation," and in 
a note denies that Harpsfield had 
related the story of Wyatt. "A 
friend of mine," he says, " has gone 
over the whole of that MSS., and 
tells me that no mention of Wyatt s 
occurs in any part of it." 

a Charles Brandon was "son to 
Sir William Brandon that bare king 
Henry VII. s standard at Bosworth 
field, and was there slain. ; Stow, p. 
495. He was created viscount Lisle 
and duke of Suffolk, Feb. 2, 1514. 



[BOOK i. 

words of Wyatt to tlie king, who answered that he had 
no wish to see anything of the kind Wyatt was a bold 
villain, not to be trusted. Why should I go on ? The 
king told everything to Anne Boleyn, who shunned 
Wyatt ; and that avoidance of him saved his life, for he 
too might have suffered death with the others when 
Anne s incest and adultery were detected. 

When Wolsey had come back from France, 1 the king 
directed him to prosecute the cause of the divorce to the 
utmost of his power, and to press the Pope on the subject, 
chiding him somewhat sharply because of the slowness 
of his procedure. For if Catherine was to be put away 
and on this Wolsey was of one mind with the king 
why should he not be at liberty to marry an English 
woman as well as a foreigner ? It was not in Wolsey s 
power now to draw back from the enterprise on which 
they had entered ; although he was in sore distress, he 
however put on a good face, and promised to exert him 
self. 2 He invites both the king and Anne to York 
House, where he entertains them at a sumptuous feast. 3 

1 About the end of September or 
the beginning of October A.D. 1527, 
i.e., not long before the courts sat 
in Michaelmas term, according to 
Cavendish, p. 186, ed. Singer, who 
says that the Cardinal, after visiting 
the king, l returned to his house at 
Westminster, where he remained 
until Michaelmas term, -which was 
within a fortnight after." 

2 He then drew up the instruc 
tions for Sir Gregory Casali ; the 
faculties which the Pope was to 
grant him for determining the 
validity or invalidity of the dis 
pensation, and which the Pope so 
he desired was to sign blindly, 
trusting to Wolsey s honour. Sir 
Gregory was to say to the Pope, on 
behalf of the Cardinal, that he, the 
Cardinal, " pro re nulla quantumque 
grandi, nullo favore aut commodo, 
quicquam effecturum quod aversetur 

officio meo, et erga Christum prse- 
stitae professioni, neque unquam a 
recto, vero justoque tramite digres- 
surum." But he insisted on being 
the judge, and in the same letter to 
Sir Gregory had said that the mar 
riage was not lawful. The letter is 
printed by Burnet, Hist. Reform., 
iv. 19, ed. Pocock. 

3 Cavendish, p. 134, ed. Singer, 
1827. "And yet the Cardinal, 
espying the great zeal that the king 
had conceived in this gentlewoman, 
ordered himself to please as well 
the king as her, dissimuling the 
matter that lay hid in his breast, 
and prepared great banquets and 
solemn feasts to entertain them both 
at his own house. And thus the 
world began to grow into wonderful 
inventions not heard of before in 
this realm." 


Everybody was at this time talking of the divorce. 
All those urged it on in every way who thought that their 
advancement could be secured only by disturbances, for 
they saw a road open to the highest honours through 
the divorce. On the other hand, those who confessed 
the faith, loving only the truth, defended the cause of 
the queen, abandoned openly by men, as the most just. 
Books were everywhere written some in defence of the 
marriage, others against it. One of the books attacking 
the marriage was presented to the king, and read in the 
presence of many bishops in the palace of Cardinal 
Wolsey, but most of the prelates dared say nothing 
either in favour of the truth or in condemnation of the 
king beyond this, that there were passages in the book 
which might reasonably make the king scrupulous about 
the marriage of himself and queen Catherine. 1 Every 
good man, and every learned man, was strongly against 
the divorce, and hardly anybody but the impious and 
the ignorant favoured it ; nor was the king so dull as 
not to see that his cause met with grave opposition, and 
was in peril of being lost. 

He sends for Thomas More, whom he knew to be a 
man of the highest ability, exceedingly learned and per 
fectly honest, and asks him his opinion about the mar 
riage. More at the time was a member of the council, but 
he was not yet chancellor. 2 He answered candidly that he 
did not at all approve of the divorce. 3 Henry did not 

1 Sir Thomas More seems to speak liis marriage: which, while he could 

of this (Strype, Mem., i. ii. p. 197) not otherwise avoid, he did well and 

in his letter to Cromwell : " Which virtuously, for the acquiescing of his 

book was afterward at York Place, conscience,to sue and procure to have 

in my Lord Cardinal s chamber, read his doubt decided by judgment of 

in the presence of divers bishops and the Church." 

many learned men. And they all 2 Sir Thomas More received the 

thought that there appeared in the seals Oct. 25, 1529, and took the 

book good and reasonable causes oath of his office the next day. 

that might move the king s high- 3 Sir Thomas More himself in a 

ness, being so virtuous a prince, to letter to Cromwell (Strype, Mem., i. 

conceive in his mind a scruple against ii. 197) speaks of this : " At which 


like the answer, but lie would leave no stone unturned 
to serve his purpose, so he promised the highest rewards 
to Sir Thomas if he would conform his view to that of the 
king, and then commanded him to take counsel on the 
subject with Dr. Fox, provost of King s College, Cam 
bridge. 1 This Dr. Fox was the most zealous of all the 


promoters of the divorce. But so far from changing his 
opinion after the conference was More, that he would 
have urged the king with far greater freedom not to 
put away his wife, if he had the opportunity ; but the 
king never touched upon the subject again, though in 
other affairs the services of More were regarded above 
those of all others. The king used to say that if Sir 
Thomas More were won over to his side, it would do 
more for him than the assent of half his kingdom. 

About this time Mary Boleyn, the elder sister, 2 seeing 
that Anne was preferred to her, and that she herself was 
slighted not only by the king but by her sister, went to 
the queen, and bade her be of good cheer; for though the 
king, she said, was in love with her sister, he could never 
marry her, for the relations of the king with the family 

time not presuming to look that his ployed in the diplomatic service. He 

highness should anything take that seems to have been a heretic very 

point for the more proved or im- early, and accepted the bishopric of 

proved for my poor mind in so great Hereford in 1535, retaining with it 

a matter, I showed, nevertheless, as the provostship of King s College, 

my duty was, at his commandment, and died in London May 8, 1538. 

what thing I thought upon the He was consecrated by Cranmer, 

words which I there read. Where- and without Bulls, therefore never a 

upon his highness accepting "benignly lawful bishop. 

my sudden unadvised answer, com- 2 It has been said of late years that 

manded me to commune further with Mary was younger than Anne. Mr. 

Mr. Fox, now his grace s almoner, Brewer (Letters, &c., iv. Introd. p. 

and to read a book with him that ccxxvi) writes : " We must infer 

then was making for that matter." that Mary was the elder sister. Any 

1 Edward Fox, born in Dursley, doubt on that head is entirely dis- 

Gloucestershire ; educated at Eton pelled by the petition presented to 

and King s College, which he entered Lord Burghley in 1597 by Mary s 

March 12, 1512. He was elected grandson, the second Lord Hunsd on, 

provost Dec. 27, 1528. He be- claiming the earldom of Ormond in 

came also archdeacon of Leicester virtue of Mary s right as the elder 

and Dorset. Soon after, he was daughter." 
made the king s almoner, and em- 


were of such a nature as to make a marriage impossible 
by the laws of the Church. " The king himself," she 
said, " will not deny it, and I will assert it publicly 
while I live ; now, as he may not marry my sister, so 
neither will he put your majesty away." 

The queen thanked her, and replied that all she had 
to say and do would be said and done under the direc 
tion of her lawyers. 

But Henry was held back not so much by his respect 
for the laws of the Church as by his fear of the emperor 
Charles Y. ; for he knew too well that the emperor 
would not patiently endure the divorce of his aunt, and 
that his own subjects would be angry if he entered into 
new and questionable relations with the French, and 
deserted the ancient alliance of the house of Burgundy, 
with which they were bound by the gainful bonds of 
trade. He saw also that men loved and admired the queen 
for her goodness, while Anne Boleyn was everywhere 
regarded as a woman of unclean life, and that Wolsey, 
his chief minister, was not so earnest in the matter as he 
had been ; and last of all, he remembered the account he 
had one day to give before the judgment-seat of God. 
The thought of this pursued him night and day ; he 
could come to no decision, and was unable to sleep. 
Whether he had friends he knew not, but he was certain 
he had enemies ; and besides this, his own conscience 
condemned him, and he regarded his life as joyless. 

But when he could not indulge his passions except on 
the condition of making Anne Boleyn his wife, and was 
by some told that his marriage with Catherine was 
against law, knowing also that he had rendered such 
services to Pope Clement, in return for which he might 
confidently expect that the Pope would do for him all 
that he was asking him to do, and that both the neigh 
bouring princes and his own subjects would yield before 



the authority of the Pope, he doggedly made up his 
mind, overcome by his passions, to put Catherine away, 
to make Anne his wife, and disregard the emperor, then 
at variance with France and Venice. And certainly if 
the Eoman Pontiff were not he whom, because he sits in 
the see of Peter, the effectual prayer of Christ Himself 
has made strong in the faith, 1 there was every appearance 
that Clement would have yielded in everything to the 
wishes of the king. 

While the king was thus tormented, Wolsey also was 
troubled in the same way, carried to and fro in the 
tumult of his thoughts. At one moment he was glad to 
see the emperor slighted by the king, at another grieved 
at the elevation of Anne Boleyn to the highest rank. At 
one time he was afraid the king would dismiss him with 
contempt and find other means to obtain the divorce, at 
another time he hoped that the king s passion for Anne 
Boleyn would die out, and that he might be persuaded 
to marry the sister of the most Christian king. Any 
how the Cardinal, domineered by his lust of power, 
forced himself to satisfy the desires of the king. 
1 St. Luke xxii. 32. 

( 35) 



THE king and the Cardinal resolved to send Stephen 
Gardiner 1 and Francis Bryan as ambassadors to the 
Pope. 2 Gardiner was one of the most learned lawyers of 
the day, and was now in the service of the king, having 
been hitherto of the household of Wolsey. These men, 
to make themselves the more welcome to the Pontiff, 
made efforts at Venice in the king s name to obtain 
the restitution of Ravenna to the Apostolic See : the 
Venetians, however, refused to do so then. From Venice 
they went to Orvieto, where the Pope was residing at 
the time. 3 When they came into the presence of His 

1 Stephen Gardiner, educated at the king s secretary, but who, like 
Cambridge, master of Trinity Hall Gardiner, had been trained in the 
in 1525. In 1529 he was made arch- service of the Cardinal. 

deacon of Norfolk, of Worcester and 3 Clement VII. had then made his 
of Leicester in 1531, at the end of escape from Rome, and was in great 
which, Dec. 3, he was consecrated distress, but Gardiner (Pocock, Re- 
bishop of Winchester. He was de- cords, i. 89) is so far from being 
prived of the mastership of Trinity touched at the sight of the Vicar of 
Hall under Edward VI., but was re- God in his poverty that he thus 
stored in 1556, and continued to hold writes: "The Pope lieth in an old 
the office with his bishopric for the palace of the bishops of this city, 
rest of his life. Gardiner was one of ruinous and decayed, where, or we 
the most zealous agents of the king come to his privy -bedchamber, we 
in the matter of the divorce, and in. pass three chambers, all naked and 
the maintenance of his supremacy. unhanged, the roofs fallen down, and 

2 Gardiner went first with Edward as we can guess, thirty persons, rif- 
Fox, the king s almoner, and set out raf and other, standing in the cham- 
on his journey in the second week of ber for a garnishment. And as for 
Feb. 1528. Sir Francis Bryan went the Pope s bedchamber, all the ap- 
in November following, having as parel in it was not worth twenty 
his companion Peter Vannes, then nobles, bed and all." 


Holiness they congratulated him on his escape, and then 
laid their two proposals before him. The first was that 
His Holiness should join the league of the English and 
the French against the emperor; the second, that he 
should by his authority dissolve the marriage of Henry 
and Catherine, who, they confessed, was a most noble 
and virtuous lady, but the widow of the king s brother. 
Of this marriage they said that it was contrary to the 
law of nature, and that Julius II. was deceived into 
sanctioning it, seeing that he had no power to dispense 
with the divine law. 

The scruples of the king, they avow, might have been 
removed at home by the English bishops ; but the king, 
to give no ground for the emperor to suspect that the 
English bishops had arranged the matter in the king s 
interests only, preferred to have the question brought 
before the sovereign court of the whole Church. His 
Holiness could settle the matter most easily, for the 
divorce once agreed upon by the king and queen, 1 the 
queen, a saintly woman, desirous of a more austere life, 
would without difficulty withdraw into a monastery. 
No better judges for the settlement of the question could 
be assigned than the distinguished Cardinals Campeggio 2 
and Wolsey 3 the one at present in England, having a 
perfect knowledge of the matter ; the other having been 

1 Gardiner, writing from Orvieto, Bologna, and in 1525 resigned. He 
March 31, 1528 (Pocock, Records, i. was Cardinal Protector of England 
101), says that the Pope asked him in 1524, and in the same year, on 
" whether the king s highness had the king s petition, Clement VII. 
at any time broken this matter to made him administrator of the see 
the queen," and that he answered, of Salisbury, and in 1535 Henry 
" Yes, and that she showed herself VIII. deprived him. 

content to stand to the judgment of 3 Gardiner and Fox, writing to Car- 

the Church." dinal Wolsey from Orvieto, March 3 1 , 

2 Lorenzo Campeggio succeeded his 1528 (Pocock, Eecords, i. 104), say, 
father as professor of law in Bologna. " We thought Cardinal Campegius 
and on the death of his wife was should be a very meet personage to 
sent for to Rome, made auditor of be sent into England, who might, 
the Rota and bishop of Feltre A.D. being there jointly with your grace, 
1512. In 1523 he was translated to proceed in this matter." 


at a former time in that country with the power of a 
Legate, 1 sent by Leo X., could not be wholly unacquainted 
with English affairs. 

The Pope having thanked both the king and them, and 
explained why he could not enter into the French league, 
he wished them to lay the question of the divorce before 
certain Cardinals and theologians ; if it could be shown 
that the king s petition could be lawfully granted, he 
would not only grant it, but would congratulate himself 
that he had an opportunity of showing how thankful he 
was to so great a prince, who, by the most learned work 
lie had written in defence of the seven sacraments of 
the Church, had rendered such great services to the 
Church at large, and who also had lately come to the 
assistance of the Apostolic See, and, above all, had placed 
the Pope under infinite obligations by delivering him 
out of the hands of his enemies. 2 

The Cardinals and the theologians having heard the 
arguments and reasonings of the ambassadors, with one 
consent reported that the marriage of Henry and Cath 
erine was valid and lawful, and forbidden by no divine 
law. The passage in Leviticus about the brother s wife 
must of necessity be interpreted so that it shall not 
clash with the law afterwards declared in Deuteronomium, 
by which the surviving brother is commanded to marry 

1 The peaceful entry of the Legate et Durand, Ampliss. Collect., iii. 

into England A.D. 1518 was pur- 1284. 

chased by Leo X. at a heavy price. 2 Gardiner and Fox, writing to Car- 

Wolsey threatened to bar his passage dinal Wolsey from Orvieto, March 31, 

unless his faculties were withdrawn, 1528 (Pocock, Records, i. in), say, 

and he (Wolsey) made co-Legate " The Pope s Holiness said that all 

with Campeggio. Leo X. gave way. that which with his honour he might 

If the Cardinal had indulged his do, he would do it gladly without 

ambition less, it would have been trait or difficulty." P. 113, "His 

better for him and for England, for Holiness said he gladly would do all 

the Legatine faculties thus wrung things he might by his authority do." 

from the Pope supplied the king P. 95, "Agreeable with law and 

with the means of his utter un- equity." But law and equity were 

doing twelve years later. See understood in another sense by 

the Cardinal s letter in Martene Henry and his counsellors. 


the wife of his brother dying without issue. 1 These 
laws are perfectly in unison, the latter being only an 
exception to the first ; or if they are contradictory, it is 
not the law in Leviticus that must prevail, but that in 
Deuteronomium, which repeals it. As for the words of 
St. John the Baptist, "it is not lawful for thee to have 
thy brother s wife," 2 brought forward by the ambassa 
dors, it is plain that the Baptist was speaking of a 
brother then living, the tetrarch of Iturea and Tracho- 
nitis, 3 to whom a daughter had been born ; whereas 
Arthur, the king s brother, not only was not living, but 
had left no children of the marriage. 4 In a question so 
free from doubt, no judges should be appointed, least of 
all in England, where everything would be at the king s 
mercy ; and above all, those should not be sent as judges 
who, having received great favours from the king, were 
therefore in a greater measure than others bound to 
serve him. 

When this report was made known to Dr. Stephen, 5 
he went back to the Pope, and said that there were 
theologians in Eome of another opinion, and added that 
the king, even if the marriage were not forbidden by 
the divine law, would make it plain that the dispensa 
tion granted by Pope Julius was by no means canonical 
or lawful ; he was exceedingly surprised that the ques 
tion was not referred to judges for its solution at the 
request of a king who had done such services to the 

1 Levit. xviii. 16 ; Deuter. xxv. 5. brother being yet alive ; . . . but if 

2 St. Mark vi. 18. his brother die childless, then he 

3 St. Luke iii. i. ought to have her, and that she is 

4 Tyndale (Practice of Prelates, p. bound to offer herself to the other 
328, ed. Parker Society) argues in brother, by the law of Moses ; and 
the same way : " I see no remedy that it is lawful now, though no 
but that a man must understand the commandment." 

text thus that Moses forbiddeth a 5 Dr. Stephen Gardiner. He is 

man to take his brother s wife as long called Dr. Stephen or Steven as often, 

as his brother liveth, . . . and there- if not more frequently, than Dr. 

fore John rebuked Herod for taking Gardiner, 
his brother s wife from him, his 



Church, seeing that the like petition from private persons 
would not be refused : he expected a more favourable 
answer from His Holiness. 1 The Pontiff said, " What 
I can do lawfully for the king, that I will do. 2 This, 
however, is not a question of human law, but of a 
Christian marriage ; and as that is a sacrament insti 
tuted by Christ, it is not in my power to change the 
law : you are asking for the dissolution of a marriage, 
when man cannot sever that which God has united ; a 
marriage, too, entered into with the sanction of my 
predecessor, confirmed by a cohabitation of twenty 
years and the birth of children. Besides, does not 
the matter touch the honour both of Catherine the 
queen and of Charles the emperor ? Who will answer for 
it, that such a divorce may not be the occasion of a great 
war ? It is my duty to take care that no troubles that 
I can hinder shall rise to disturb the Church of God." 

So spoke the Pope, but he referred the question again 
to other Cardinals and theologians. Among these, 

1 Gardiner (ut supra, p. no) con- " He would it were done;" but that 

fesses that he threatened the Pope, did not mean that he would approve 

" I said the king s highness would of it, but that such an act on the 

take very strangely, and would think part of Henry would bring the cause 

his manifold benefits ill employed, to a decision sooner ; for the Pope 

if in the manner and form of obtain- adds, " In a matter in qua vertitur 

ing justice there shall no more re- jus tertii he could do nothing without 
spect be had of his person and weight 
of his cause than promiscuce vlebis : 

the counsel of them, and wished that 
it were in his power to give the 

ne obtain more here after so" great king s highness somewhat depend 
ing only of his own particular hurt 
or damage, without touching any 
man s rights, with suchlike words, 
nothing sounding to the further- 

charges, costs, and delay of time, 
than his majesty might have ob 
tained at home. Not doubting but 
his majesty understanding hereof 
would use domestico remedio apud ance: 

Again, after the trial in 
London, Dr. Bennet, in a letter from 

2 The Pope never spoke in any Rome, Oct. 27, 1530, reporting the 

Pope s answer to his demands, says, 
He said that he would do nothing 

other sense throughout the progress 
of this suit. Gardiner and Gregory 

Casali threatened the Pontiff " that in this matter, but that the law will, 

the king would do it without him." 
This was on April i, 1528, before 
the Legates were appointed. The 
answer of the Pope was (Pocock, Re 
cords, i. 127), according to Gardiner, 

neither for your highness, neither 
for the French king, neither for the 
emperor; and other answer we could 
not get of him." 


though some said it would be better to try the question 
in Kome, where justice was done to all, than to have it 
tried in England, where everything would be at the king s 
mercy, yet there were others who, fashioning ecclesiasti 
cal affairs for political ends, and complaining loudly of 
the heresies that had lately grown up in Germany, and of 
the excessive lukewarmness of other princes in the defence 
of the faith, were of opinion that Henry, a most zealous 
defender of the faith, should be more gently dealt with, 
especially as it was said, that the queen was willing 
to enter a monastery. It certainly seemed very hard, 
to them, that judges should not be appointed at the 
request of so great a king; it was possible that the 
king, during the progress of the suit, if at present 
somewhat perverse, might be brought by degrees to a 
better mind. Why stand in the way of a trial ? It is 
in the power of the Pope to have the cause at any time 
brought before himself. 

The latter opinion prevailed with the Pope, partly 
because he favoured Henry very much, and partly 
because he had no suspicion whatever that all that which 
had been said to him about the consent of Catherine, 
and of her desire to become a nun, was false. Accord 
ingly Lorenzo Campeggio and Thomas AVolsey, Cardinals, 
priests, and bishops, were appointed judges in the 



THOUGH nothing had been said to the queen about the 
embassy sent to Eome, 1 yet the moment she suspected 
that something of the kind was done, she wrote to the 
Pope begging him to send no Legates to try the ques 
tion of the divorce in England, for that would be 
nothing else but to make the king a judge in his own 
cause. She wrote also to the emperor, and told him of 
Wolsey s intrigue and of the king s purpose, earnestly 
beseeching him not to abandon his aunt, who must 
endure these wrongs because of the hatred borne to the 

The imperial ambassador complained to the Pope that 
the king of England had sent his agents secretly from 
England to Eome, and had kept the fact from the 
knowledge of the queen, who was chiefly concerned in 
the matter, and that judges had been appointed before 
the Pope had heard what the queen had to say in her 
own defence. "What scandals will arise," he said, 
" when the emperor defends his aunt against the wrong 
doings of the king ! "What was to be looked for from 

1 The king was afraid of the 22, ed. Pocock), in which he says, 

queen s interference from the first, " Lest the queen should prevent us 

and there is a letter of his to the by the emperor s means in our great 

Cardinal, Sept. 1527 (Burnet, vi. matter." 


England in its present state, where the most wicked 
men, because they encouraged the king in his evil 
courses, were raised to all places of honour, but where 
the good and faithful people, who, purely through the 
fear of God, defended the cause of the queen, were 
thrust out of every place of honour which they held ? " 

Then the Pope, seeing that the information given him 
by the king was false, sent four messengers in all haste, 
by different roads, with directions to Campeggio to 
travel as slowly as he could, 1 and on his arrival in Eng 
land, to make every effort to reconcile the king and 
the queen, and if he should fail, then to persuade the 
latter to become a religious. 2 But if in that also he 
should fail, he was at least not to pronounce the sen 
tence of divorce without a fresh and clear command of 
the Pope. "This," said the Pope, " you must regard as 
the final and most serious injunction." 

He wrote other letters also from Viterbo, in which he 
clearly showed that if the matter concerned only him 
self, he would have shrunk from no danger for the sake 
of the king, but now the king s wishes could not be 
satisfied without injustice and public scandal. 

Campeggio 3 arrived in London October 7, 1528, and 

1 This is the explanation of the [Campegio] imposui ut divortium regi 
words of Campeggio " Quanto alia dissuaderet, persuaderet reginse." See 
negociatione mia ch io vada adagio, also the account of the interview 
lo 1 ho fatto, et quanto mi sara lecito between the Legates and the queen, 
lo faro por la cagione che ella scrive " given by Du Bellay, in Le Grand, 
in his letter from Paris to Salviati, iii. 195. 

secretary of the Pope. According to 3 He was lodged the first night in 

Theiner, the letter is dated i6th Nov. the house of the duke of Suffolk, in 

1528, doubtless a mistake for Sep- the borough, and the next day was to 

tember, seeing that Cardinal Cam- make his public entry into London, 

peggio was in London during that But as he was suffering from gout, 

month. he avoided the fatigues of that cere- 

2 In the letter of John Casali, mony, and was carried in a boat 
Dec. 17 (Burnet, iv. 67, ed. Pocock ; towards evening to the palace of the 
and Le Grand, iii. 117), in which the bishop of Bath and Wells, where he 
writer gives an account of an audi- remained. The next morning, Fri- 
ence of the Pope, the fact is thus day, he was visited by the Cardinal 
stated : " Ego, inquit [Pontifex], illi of York, and on the 22d was received 




on being introduced to the king by "Wolsey, 1 on behalf 
of the Pope, the Cardinals, the clergy, and people of 
Borne, he offered their services to Henry as the one whom 
they regarded as their deliverer. Fox then, on the part 
of the king, replied. That done, the king and the two 
Cardinals withdrew together, and had a long and secret 
conference on the question of the divorce. The arrival 
of Campeggio was most disagreeable to men of every 
rank in the kingdom, for it was commonly reported that 
he was come for the purpose of setting aside the mar 
riage of the king with his saintly queen. 2 To her above 
all was it painful, and her nights and days were spent 
in mourning and in weeping. 

Campeggio sent persons to her in secret, and made 
attempts to console her ; but when he advised her to 
enter, of her own accord, some religious order, at least 
for the security of her life, she answered resolutely that 
she was determined to uphold the marriage to the ut 
most of her power, a marriage which the Eoman Church 

in public by the king. On the fol 
lowing day the king called on the 
Cardinal after dinner, and in answer 
to his proposal to obtain a dispensa 
tion to ratify the marriage, and there 
by take away all scruples, the king 
answered, that to effect that he did 
not wish for such a dispensation, and 
insisted on the invalidity of the form 
er, and the nullity of the marriage. 
Theiner Monum. Hibernorum, p. 

1 Stow, p. 541. "On the Qth of 
October he came from St. Mary 
Overy s by water to the bishop of 
Bath s palace, without Temple Bar, 
where he was visited by the Cardinal 
of York and divers other estates and 
prelates ; and after he had rested 
him a season, he was brought to the 
king s presence, then being at Bride 
well, by the Cardinal of York, and 
was carried in a chair between four 
persons, for he was not able to stand, 

and the Cardinal of York and he sat 
both on the right hand of the king s 
throne, and there one Francisco, 
secretary to Cardinal Campeius, 
made an eloquent oration in Latin, 
.... to the which oration Doctor 
Fox, provost of Cambridge, made a 
discrete answer." 

* Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. ii. pp. 99, lop. " Nothing was 
touched at this time openly of the 
king s great matter, but much and 
divers talk and rumour came abroad 
after the coming of the Legate. 
Neither would men spare to talk 
freely and frankly, that the king to 
serve his own appetite and pleasure 
more than for any just impediment 
in his marriage, had procured the 
said Legate to be sent for that he 
might be divorced from the queen, 
which almost universally was mis- 
liked, especially among the common 



[BOOK i. 

had once decreed as lawful. She would not acknowledge 
him as judge whose appointment to that office was not 
so much made by the Pope as wrung from him by 
manifest falsehood on the part of the king. 

Campeggio understood her. He then wrote to the 
Pope, and told him of the queen s resolution and of the 
excessive pressing of the king to have the matter ended ; 
he informed him also that Wolsey, whose name was 
before his in the commission, was wholly bent on pro 
nouncing for the divorce, 1 and then begged His Holiness 
to tell him as soon as possible what he was to do. The 
Pope remained silent, for at this time his sole object was 
delay ; and so nothing more was done in the matter for 
six months, from October 7, 1528, to May 28, 1529. 

The king, seeing the indignation of the people 2 at his 
attempt to put away so noble a woman as his wife for 
the sake of a woman unclean of life, called peers and 
commons together on the 8th day of November, and 
in their presence declared upon oath that he had begun 
this process solely from conscientious scruples, and not 

1 Cardinal Campeggio, writing 
from London, October 17, 1528, says 
that the Cardinal Wolsey and the 
king " erano risoluti in questa ma- 
teria di venire alia dissolutions del 
matrimonio," and that he could not 
shake in the least degree the deter 
mination of Wolsey, " allegando che 
se non si seguiva il desiderio del Be, 
il quale e munito et giustificato da 
molte ragioni, scritture et consigli di 
molti homini litterati et timorati di 
Dio, che ne seguira presta et total 
ruina del regno, di sua Signoria re- 
verendissima, et della reputation e ec- 
clesiastica in questo regno." Theiner, 

PP- 57> 57 * 

52 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. ii. p. 100. " For the repress 
ing of which talk the king assem 
bled at his palace at Bridewell, in 
the month of November, his no 
bility, judges, and councillors, with 
divers other persons, to whom he 

declared the great worthiness of his 
wife, both for her nobility and vir 
tue and all princely qualities to be 
such that if he were to marry again, 
he would of all women match with 
her, if the marriage might be found 
good and lawful. But her worthi 
ness notwithstanding, and that he 
had a fair daughter by her, he said 
he was wonderfully tormented in. 
conscience, for that he understood 
by many great clerks, with whom 
he had consulted, that he had lived 
all this while in detestable and 
abominable adultery, wherefore, for 
the settling of his conscience, and 
the sure and firm succession of the 
realm, he did advocate this Legate, 
as a man most indifferent, and said 
that if she by the law of God should 
be adjudged his lawful wife, there 
was never thing more pleasant and 
acceptable to him in all his life." 


because he was in love with any other woman ; l there 
was not a more saintly woman, or one of nobler birth 
than his wife, and he had no fault to find with her but 
that of having been his brother s wife. The people who 
heard him swear this were amazed at the impudence of 
the man : the lewdness and adulteries of his life crying 
out aloud that he was not so tenderly devout as to be 
much troubled by scruples of conscience. 

Campeggio persuaded the king to allow the matter 
to be settled in a friendly way, and not by means of an 
unfriendly lawsuit. The king was pleased with the ad 
vice he gave, and the Cardinals with his consent went 
to the queen 2 to induce her to enter some religious order. 
But when they had said, by way of preface, that they had 
received a commission from the Pope to try the question 
of the validity of her marriage, she interrupted them at 
once, and told them that they were opening a question 
settled for ever settled not only in the councils of two 
of the most prudent monarchs, but in the consistory of 
the Pope, Pope Julius. The matter is determined by a 
married life of twenty years, and by the birth of children, 
the congratulation and the sanction of Christendom. 
Then, looking at Wolsey, she added, " I am indebted 
for this sorrow to you alone, who persecute me with so 
much hatred, either because I have not been able to 
endure your ambition and your immoral life, or because 
my nephew the emperor took no pains to obtain for you 
the Papacy." 3 

1 At this time Cardinal Wolsey " Not long after this both the Legates 

had in his possession a letter written repaired to the queen and told her 

by both the king and Anne Boleyn, that they were appointed by the 

urging the hurrying on of the di- Pope judges to hear and determine 

vorce. See Burnet s Hist. Reform., the controversy lately risen touching 

i. p. 103, ed. Pocock. her marriage with the king, and to 

* The two Cardinals went to the give a final sentence whether it were 

queen, Tuesday, Oct. 27. Theiner, consonant with the law of God or 

578. no. The queen, after the hearing 

3 Harpsfield, ut supra, p. 101. of this, being abashed and aston- 

4 6 


[BOOK i. 

Then, when they saw her great distress, and the tears 
which she could not control, they thought it better to 
refrain from further discussion and to do the rest of their 
work by the mouth of others. 

The king 1 kept Christmas in great splendour, with 
jousts, banquets, and pageants, to which the Cardinals 
were asked, and made a display in the sight of all the people 
of his passion for Anne Boleyn. Wolsey warned him that 
he must be careful of his own honour at least, and leave 
Anne to her father s care till the end of the trial. At last 
the king consented, not without difficulty, that at least 
during Lent they should not see one another. But when 
Lent was over, he ordered Thomas Boleyn, whom he had 
already raised to the peerage as Lord Eochford, 2 to bring 
Anne back secretly to court. At the same time he wrote 
a letter full of love to Anne herself, and most tenderly 
begged her to return. But she would not go back to 

led, and pausing awhile, Alas ! 
my lords, saith she, that now al 
most after twenty years there should 
any such question be once moved, 
and that men should now go about 
to dissolve and undo this marriage 
as wicked and detestable/ imputing 
the original of all her trouble to 
Cardinal Wolsey and to his deadly 
feud against the emperor, whom, he 
of all princes of Europe most ma 
ligned and hated, because he would 
not serve and content his immode 
rate ambition, aspiring to be made 
Pope. The Cardinal, on the other 
side, laid all the fault from himself, 
and declared that this thing chanced 
far against his will. He said he was 
by the Pope assigned to be a judge 
in this cause, and swore by his pro 
fession that he would, in hearing the 
same, minister justice and right in 

1 Hall, 756. "The king kept 
his Christmas at Greenwich with 
much solemnity and great plenty of 
viands, and thither came the two 

Legates, which were received by 
two dukes and divers earls, barons, 
and gentlemen, to whom the king 
shewed great pleasures, both of justs 
and tourney, banquets, masks, and 
disguisings. And on the twelfth clay 
he made the lawful son of Cardinal 
Campeius, born in wedlock, knt, 
and gave him a collar of S.S. in 
gold. But the queen shewed to them 
no manner of countenance, and made 
no great joy of nothing : her mind 
was so troubled." 

2 Sir Thomas Boleyn was created 
Viscount Eochford June 18, 1525. 
On the same day Henry Fitzroy, 
the son of Elizabeth Blount and of 
Henry VIII., was created earl of 
Nottingham and duke of Richmond 
and Somerset. Sir Thomas Boleyn 
was made earl of Wiltshire Dec. 8, 
1529. Du Bellay, writing to the 
grand master of France Dec. 26, 
1527, says that there was a report at 
this time that Sir Thomas Boleyn 
was to be made duke of Somerset. 
Le Grand, iii. 76. 


him who had sent her so undeservedly away ; nor could 
her mother persuade her by any means to go back to 
the king. But when Thomas Boleyn, who used to say 
that the king s wrath is the messenger of death, advised 
her to return as soon as possible, unless she wished to be 
the ruin of herself and of the whole house of Boleyn, she 
answered, " I will go, but when I shall once have that 
man within my clutches, I will treat him as he deserves." 
Then the king, to soothe her temper, forgetting all 
respect to his own name and honour, received her 
with greater magnificence than he had ever clone 

But as to the question of the divorce. When the 
king saw that all theologians and canonists were of one 
mind, namely, that the marriage would have been 
unlawful but for the authority of Julius IT., who dis 
pensed with the observance of the ecclesiastical law, he 
strained every nerve to break the force of that dispensa 
tion of the Pope. 1 

To that end special instructions 2 were given to Stephen 
Gardiner and Sir Francis Bryan, who were still in Eome, 
to spend money without stint, and to promise large 
presents to those Cardinals and theologians who might 
be of service to them. The king, too, by his ambas 
sadors, asked the Pope to pronounce the dispensation 

1 The Cardinal in November 1528, et acceptissimam regice majestati 

and now one of the two judges faciet" 

before whom the cause was to be 2 The heads of these instructions 

tried, instructed the ambassadors in have been published by Mr. Pocock, 

Spain to find proofs of the forgery Records, i. p. 189. Among them are 

of the second Brief of Julius these: "Declaratio Pontificis per Bul- 

II., saying himself that he re- lam quod matrimonium ab initio 

garded that Brief as a forgery . . . non esset verum. De trahendis 

" Verum si falsum, quod arbitror " amicis in partem regis verbis, pollici- 

(Pocock, Records, i. 187), and that tationibus et aliis modis quibuscun- 

it would be a most pleasing ser- que. De lucrandis et attrahendis 

vice to the king to throw more sus- cardinalibus in partem regis et prse- 

picion upon it "rem yravissimam sertim Sanctorum Quatuor." 


granted by Pope Julius a forgery, and therefore worth 
less ; and secondly, for the settlement of the royal suc 
cession, to sanction the marriage of the princess Mary, 
the daughter of Henry and Catherine, with the duke of 
Eichmond, the bastard child of the king. 1 

The third request was made in writing, and not by 
word of mouth : the king with his own hand wrote 
and subscribed a petition to His Holiness who can 
temper and relax the ecclesiastical laws, by his Apos 
tolic authority in which he prayed the Pope to allow 
his marriage with Anne Boleyn, notwithstanding the 
impediment of the canon law, 2 which made it unlaw 
ful because of his criminal relations with Mary, the sister 
of Anne. 3 

That the king wrote that letter and made that request 
is hinted at by Cardinal Cajetan, and plainly asserted by 
Cardinal Pole, 4 who adds that even this last request 
would have been granted, if it could have been shown that 
Pope Julius had not the power to grant the dispensation 
which made the marriage of Henry and Catherine lawful. 

1 Cardinal Campeggio, in his letter coitu proveniente." See Pocock. 
written from England to Rome, says Records, i. p. 26, Dod. ed. Tierneyi 
that this project was then discussed i. p. 357. The only person excluded 
when he came over as Legate, by the king was the widow of his 
Theiner, Vet. Hon., p. 571: "Et brother " dummodo relicta died 
han pensato di maritarla con dis- fratris tui non fuerit." The date 
pensa di S. S. al figliol naturale of the desired Bull was Dec. 21, 
del re, se si potra fare." 1527. Mr. Pocock has taken his 

2 Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 57, Eyston copy from the "form in which it 
MSS. " He sought to be dispensed appears in the Record Office." 

to marry with her whose sister he 4 De Eccles. Unit. Defens., lib. iii. 

had carnally known before." c.iii. "Quiaeodem tempers quo Pon- 

3 The dispensation to be granted tificis dispensationem de uxore fratris 
by the Pope was drawn iip in ducenda rejecisti, abeodem Pontifice 
England, and contained this clause : magna vi contendebas, ut tibi liceret 
The king to be at liberty to marry ducere sororem ejus quoe concubina 
any woman, " Dummodo propter hoc tua fuisset, idque ita impetrasti, si 
rapta non fuerit, etiam si ilia tibi* ante constitisset non habuisse jus 
alias secundo aut remotiori consan- Pontificempriore ilia in causa dispen- 
guinitatis, aut primo amnitatis gradu, sandi." 

etiam ex quocunque licito vel illicito 


The course pursued with respect to the first request of 
the king was this : his ambassadors demanded the pro 
duction, and then the quashing, of the decree of Pope 
Julius in confirmation of the marriage. That the matter 
might be properly and orderly dealt with, the Pope said 
he would ask the emperor, in whose keeping was the 
original Brief of Julius, to send it either to Borne or to the 
Legates in England. The king s ambassadors demanded 
that, unless the emperor produced the Brief within two 
months from that time, the Pontiff should pronounce it 
null and of no effect. This demand w^as, by order of the 
Pope, referred to the two Cardinals, Del Monte, and of 
the Four Saints, to the Bishop Simoneta, and to certain 
theologians, who having taken it into consideration, said 
that it was against all justice, seeing that too short 
a time was allowed the emperor, and that the decree 
which the Pope was asked to make was without 
precedent. 1 

Thereupon the Pontiff said that he should write to 
the emperor, from whom he did not think that more 
could be got by threats and legal pressure than by fair 
dealing. On the other hand, the ambassadors said that 
they cared nothing for the production of the Brief if not 
produced by a certain day. 

Now, as this brought great trouble on the Pope, he 
wrote to Campeggio and blamed him for allowing such 
matters to be referred to Eome ; they should have been 
settled in England, and he should not have allowed any 
one to think that he could obtain from the Pope that 
which ought never to be granted. The secretary of the 
Pope, John Baptist Sanga, ended the letter with a com 
plaint against the king s ambassadors for the boldness 

1 The decree was drawn up in predecessor was a forgery. See the 

England, made ready for the signa- proposed decree in Pocock, Records, 

ture of the Pope, who was instructed i. 184. "Ipsum Breve pro falso ef 

to say that an authentic Brief of his nullo reputandum." 


[BOOK i. 

of their language and the threats they uttered against 
the Apostolic See, foreboding mischief if the Pope refused 
to grant the desires of the king. 1 As if His Holiness, he 
said, ought to fail in his duty, which he will not do to 
gain the whole world, or as if threats of this kind would 
not prove hurtful first of all to those who uttered them, as 
certainly they would, if the king, to gratify his passions, 
were to separate himself, as he has done at home from his 
wife, so abroad from the Apostolic See, the source and 
mother of the Christian Church. From all this it appears 
beyond all doubt that the ambassadors were well aware 
of the king s purpose to renounce the faith together with 
his wife, rather than live without Anne Boleyn. 

1 Gardiner used threatening lan 
guage when he was baffled by the 
iioman lawyers (Pocock, Kecords, i. 
133) : he said to the Pope that if he 
did not grant the divorce, Henry 
VIII. would withdraw his favour 
from the Pope, "ut indinata jam 
tSedes Apostolica iota corrueret, com- 

muni consensu atque applausu om 
nium. At these words, the Pope s 
Holiness, casting his arms abroad, 
bade us put in the words we varied 
for, and therewith walked up and 
down the chamber, casting now and 
then his arms abroad, we standing 
in great silence." 



THE king now heard from his ambassadors that none of 
his demands had been granted unconditionally by the 
Pope. Moreover, he was afraid that a general peace 
the terms of which were then under discussion at Cam- 
brai might be established ; which would make the 
Pope less dependent on him, increase the power of the 
emperor, and render his assistance less necessary to the 
king of France, to whom his children would be restored. 
Thus abandoned on all sides, he would be unable to put 
away his wife and marry Anne Boleyn without running 
into serious danger. 

In this perplexity, having first taken the advice of 
Wolsey and his lawyers, he spoke to Campeggio. The 
Legate was holding back, most justly excusing himself 
on the ground that the Brief of Pope Julius had not 
been produced, and that the Pope had ordered him. to 
proceed no further in the cause without fresh instruc 
tions. But in the end, by dint of threats, blandishments, 
presents, and importunity, the Legate, afraid for his own 
life if he did not satisfy the king, gave way, and, with 
"Wolsey, opened the court, May 28, 1529, in the Eefec- 
tory of the Blackfriars, London. 1 

1 The king s licence for the sitting otherwise would have fallen under 
of the court, and thereby for the the penalties of Prsemunire for the 
safety of the two Cardinals, who Papal jurisdiction in foro externo 


[BOOK i. 

Before the Legates entered on their work the Papal 
commission was read. Then Henry is first summoned 
by name, and two proctors 1 appeared on his behalf; and 
after him the queen. 2 She presented herself in person, 
and protesting that she did not accept them as judges 
in her cause, appealed to the Pope ; but as the Legates 
would not allow the appeal unless the queen could show 
by a rescript from the Pope that their powers had been 
withdrawn, the queen presents herself again on the next 
sitting of the court, 3 and gave in her objections in due 
form of law, as well as her reasons for appealing to the 
Pope, among which were these : 

The first, that the trial was held in a place where she 
could not hope for justice, she being a Spaniard by 

had been suppressed by Parliament 
for nearly two hundred years was 
granted May 2oth, and on the 28th 
the two Cardinals began to constitute 
the court ; and on the 3ist that 
being done, the Bull of their com 
mission was read before them, and 
they undertook to execute it, decree 
ing the citation of the king and the 
queen for the i8th day of June. 

1 The king was represented by 
Dr. Sampson, dean of the chapel, 
afterwards bishop of Chichester, and 
finally of Lich field and Coventry. 
He began his life in the service of 
Wolsey, and was for the greater 
part of his course a bitter enemy of 
the Papal jurisdiction. The other 
proctor was Dr. John Bell, who 
succeeded Latimer at Worcester. 
Neither Sampson nor Bell was pro 
perly a bishop, for they were both 
made in the schism, and without 
Bulls. Dr. Petre and Dr. Tregonnell 
were also counsel for the king. 

2 Cavendish (Life of Wolsey, p. 
213) represents the proceedings of 
May 31 and June 18 as one act. 
"The court being thus furnished 
and ordered, the judges commanded 
the crier to proclaim silence, then 
was the judges commission, which 

they had of the Pope, published and 
read openly before all the audience 
there assembled. That done, the 
crier called the king by the name 
of king Henry of England, come 
into the court/ &c. With that the 
king answered and said, Here, 
my lords. Then he called also the 
queen by the name of Katherine 
queen of England, come into the 
court/ &c., who made no answer to 
the same, but rose up incontinent 
out of her chair." 

Campeggio (Theiner, p. 583) says 
that the commission was read " the 
last day of the past month," i.e., May 
31. Harpsfield also (see note at the 
end of this chapter) says that the 
king did not appear in person, but 
by two proctors, on the day when 
the court called him by name to 
appear. Mr. Pocock has printed 
the appeal of the queen in his 
Records, ii. p. 609, and in vol. i. 
219, another appeal, in which, de 
clining absolutely the jurisdiction, 
of the Legates, the queen protests 
against the legality of the citation 
decreed against her, June 18, and 
commits her cause to the Pope. 

3 June 1 8, 1529. 


birth and a foreigner ; and that Henry, who began the 
lawsuit, was the king of all England. 

The second, that the judges were in their own per 
sons not only under obligations to the king, but also in 
his power : Wolsey holding the bishopric of Winchester, 
the archbishopric of York, and many abbeys; Cam- 
peggio holding the see of Salisbury, given him by the 


Finally, she declared solemnly on her oath that no 
thing but fear, most justly grounded, moved her to 
decline in that place, and in that cause, the sentence of 
the judges. 

Though the judges, to please the king, would not 
admit the appeal of Catherine, nevertheless, because 
they would not pronounce the sentence of divorce, the 
king did not think that they had done him any service. 
Accordingly, standing before the court himself, he made 
a public declaration that in these proceedings he was 
not urged on by any dislike of the queen, but by 
scruples of conscience and the judgment of most learned 
men; though the Cardinal of York was at hand, a 
Legate a latere, to whom singly the power of deciding 
the question might have been delegated, yet he, to 
avoid all occasions of harsh judgments, had prevailed 
upon the Bornan Pontiff, the sovereign head of the 
Church, to appoint judges to try the question, by whose 
decision, whatever it might be, he called all men to 
witness he would abide. 

When the king had spoken, the queen insisted on 
the allowance of her appeal. The judges refused. There 
upon the queen, who was sitting on the left side of the 
court, rose from her place and went up to the king, 
who was sitting under a canopy on the other side. Fall 
ing upon her knees before him, she most humbly prayed 
him, who was at home in his own kingdom, to allow 


her, a foreigner, to prosecute her appeal in Kome, before 
the common father of all Christians, and also the judge 
whom the kino- himself acknowledged. The king rose 

o o o 

from his seat, and looking at the queen with the utmost 
affection, declared that he gave her leave. The people 
present in court, seeing the faces and the demeanour of 
both husband and wife, could not refrain from weeping. 
The queen thereupon went out of the court, and im 
mediately afterwards was told that the judges and the 
king required her presence. " I will obey my husband/ 
said the queen, " but not the judges." But her lawyers 
warned her that if she returned into court, her return 
would be taken as a withdrawal of the appeal, and 
damage her cause. She sent her excuses to the king, 
and returned to Castle Baynard, from which she had 
come to the court. When, she was at home, she said to 
her lawyers, " To-day, for the first time, not to damage 
my cause, I disobeyed my lord the king ; but the very 
next time I see him, I will go on my knees, and ask 
him to forgive my fault." A woman worthy of a better 
husband ! but it was by persecution of this kind it 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, realm, wherefore lie desired that the 
bk. ii. p. 102. "The 28th of May matter might be, according to justice 
following, the Legates sat solemnly and right, quickly and speedily de- 
at the Blackfriars, where the king termined. He commended also at the 
by his two proctors, the queen per- time the queen s womanhood, wis- 
sonally appeared, witli the said four dom, nobility, and gentleness. When 
bishops and others of her counsel, the king had ended, the queen 
refusing to stand to the Legates made her protestation, and did put in 
judgment, as judges incompetent, and her libellus recusatorius, and renewed 
appealing from them to the See of her provocation, alleging cause to be 
Kome. The Legates proceeded not- advocated by the Pope s Holiness, et 
withstanding, and cited the king and litis pendentiam coram eodem, desir- 
queen to appear again the 1 8th June, ing to be admitted for probation 
upon the which day both of them made thereof, and to have a term compe- 
their appearance personally. At tent for the same. Whereupon day 
which time the king declared openly was given by the Legates till the 
the great unquietness, vexation, and 2ist of the same month for the de- 
trouble wherewith he was grievously clarations of their minds and inten- 
cumbered for his marriage, so that tions thereunto. At which day both 
lie could scarce intend any matter the king and queen appeared in per- 
touching the necessary affairs of this son. And notwithstanding the said 


pleased God to prepare for Catherine the crown of glory 
that never fades. 

Legates declared as well the sincerity 
of their minds directly and justly to 
proceed without favour and affection 
or partiality, as also that no such re- 
cusation, appellation, or term might 
be by them admitted, yet she never 
theless persisting in her former mind 
laid in her appeal, which by the said 
Legates was also refused, and they 
minding to proceed further in the 
cause, the queen would no longer 
make her abode to hear what the 
said Legates would further discern 
[decern], albeit the king requested 
and commanded her to tarry, where 
in afterwards she seemed to have 
some remorse of conscience, as it 
were for some disobedience towards 
her husband. And she reported after 
wards to some that were of her coun 
cilby whom I had intelligence of 

it that she never before in all her 
life in any one thing in the world 
disobeyed the king, her husband, 
neither now would have done, but 
that the necessary defence of her 
cause did force her thereto. Her 
proctor, notwithstanding, made an 
swer for her, and said that she would 
stick to her appeal. But the Legates 
caused her to be thrice preconisate 
and called efteoons to return and 
appear, which she refusing to do, was 
denounced by the Legates contumax, 
and a citation decerned for her appear 
ance the Friday following to make 
answer to such articles as should be 
objected unto her." The king s own 
account (Burnet, Hist. Eeform., iv. 
1 1 8, ed. Pocock) agrees even verbally 
with this of Harpsfield, and Harps- 
field had seen the king s letter. 

( 56) 




HENRY indeed for the moment granted the request of 
the queen, but it was done in order that he might not 
seem uncourteous ; for he urged the Legates in every 
way to pronounce sentence at once, and pronounce the 
Brief of Pope Julius null and void. His proctors there 
fore, when the Papal dispensation was produced in court, 
maintained that on many grounds it was not a sufficient 
justification of the marriage of Henry and Catherine, 
asserting that 

1. The Brief speaks of the marriage only, and makes 
no mention of betrothal ; but as Henry and Catherine 
were first betrothed, and the marriage is against the 
canons, the dispensation for the marriage must not be 
taken as allowing the betrothal. 

2. Nothing is said in the Brief of the age of Henry, 
who was then only twelve years old, and therefore not 

3. Moreover, that when Henry had reached the 
marriageable age, he protested that he would not wed 
Catherine. 1 

4. Besides, that this marriage was allowed for the 
purpose of preserving peace the final cause of the dis 
pensation between Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain on 

Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, sufficient protestation lawfully before 
bk. ii. p. 47, Eyston MSS. "But any judge proved." See above, note 
there was never any such just and 2, p. 5. 


the one hand, and Henry VII., king of England, on the 
other hand ; but Henry VIII. , not then of age, never 
thought of peace, and Henry VII. and Isabella were 
dead when the marriage was solemnised. 

5. That the petition presented to the Pope was the 
petition of Catherine and Henry by name, and yet they 
had given no instructions on the subject, in virtue of 
which their parents could lawfully act on their behalf. 
A false recital vitiated the whole grant. 

6. Lastly, that there were two impediments to the 
marriage one of affinity, arising out of the former mar 
riage of Catherine and Arthur ; the other resting on what 
is due to public decency, the consequence of the contract 
of marriage, though the marriage may never have really 
taken place. Pope Julius by his Brief removed the im 
pediment of affinity, but he said nothing about removing 
the other impediment of public decency. That being 
so, they asserted that because this second impediment 
had not been removed, the marriage of Henry and 
Catherine was not lawful and not valid. 

That was what the king s lawyers said. Though the 
queen would have nothing more to do with the two 
judges, her lawyers, 1 nevertheless, lest they should be 
considered as having no legal defence, either in law or 
equity, replied immediately to all the arguments of their 

They said that Pope Julius, when he removed by his 
pontifical authority the impediment created by the 
ecclesiastical law, destroyed at the same time every con- 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, tor of laws, John Fisher, bishop 

bk. ii. p. 96, Eyston MSS. "The of Rochester, and Henry Standish, 

king in the meantime licensed bishop of St. Asaph, doctors of 

queen Katherine to choose conn- divinity, with divers other, whereof 

cillors whom she would, and she some played very honest parts, and 

among other chose William Ware- stood stiffly and fast to her cause : 

ham, archbishop of Canterbury, and some played the prevaricators, and 

Nicholas West, bishop of Ely, doc- fled from her to the king s side." 


sequence of that impediment, so that the betrothal as 
well as the marriage of Henry and Catherine fell under 
the common law. Whenever, for grave reasons, an act 
is permitted to be done, all other acts without which it 
could not be done are at the same time made lawful 
also, otherwise the permission would be illusory. Henry 
was then under age, and betrothal only was lawful for 
him. The marriage has taken place with the leave of 
the Pope, and yet the lawyers on the other side foolishly 
maintain that there is a doubt whether the parties to it 
could be betrothed. Betrothal is only a promise of a 
future marriage, and is in nowise necessary to make 
any marriage valid ; but if it has taken place, it is no 
hindrance to the marriage ; on the contrary, it is most 
favourable to it. Now the marriage being allowed, the 
betrothal is allowed by implication, and is therefore 
valid. But even if it were not valid, it can do no harm 
whatever to the marriage afterwards solemnised, for the 
marriage subsists of itself without respect to betrothal, 
and unnecessary acts can never invalidate that which 
subsists independently of them. 1 

Nor is the marriage against the ecclesiastical law ; on 
the contrary, it has so much to recommend it that the 
author of the law, had he but thought of it, would have 
taken the pains to declare that, in view of the public 
good, it should be lawful for the surviving brother to 
marry the widow of the deceased. Moreover, in a case 
that cannot be regarded with favour, when the marriage 
itself has been permitted, the betrothal, which is only a 
beginning of marriage, cannot be considered as forbidden. 

There was no reason for referring to the want of age 
on the part of the king, for that alone, touching the 

1 L. Unica. Cod. de rei uxoria? allis etiam inutilibus suaiu noscitur 
actione. " Si enim cum una in instru- prsestare f ortitudinem." Note on the 
mento stipulatio valida inveniatur, margin. 


person or the matter, is necessarily to be spoken of 
which is against the law, and the mention of which is 
demanded by the principle on which the law is grounded. 
The matter in this case was not the want of age on the 
part of the king, for that was a natural defect which the 
Pontiff could not remedy, but affinity, that was an im 
pediment to the marriage, and was set out in the Brief. 

Besides, as to marriage nothing is necessary but the 
capacity of the persons, and certainly he is not unfit who 
is only twelve years of age. St. Jerome 1 tells us that 
Solomon and Achaz were fathers, the one in his eleventh, 
the other in his twelfth year. Even among private per 
sons the Papal Brief would have been good though no 
mention had been made of the age of the parties to it 
for whom the dispensation was asked ; for so slight and 
unimportant a matter as that of ages, if it had been men 
tioned, would never have moved the Pope to refrain 
from the furtherance of some greater good. How, then, 
can we imagine, that in a matter touching most powerful 
sovereigns, the Pope, who is the guardian of peace, would 
for this one thing, namely, that Henry was only twelve 
years old, put difficulties in the way of obtaining so great 
a blessing as the public peace of many kingdoms. The 
Pope is rightly very indulgent to kings, for God Him 
self seems to free them from the observance of human 
laws. 2 

As for the declaration 3 made by the king when he 
came of age, but of which Catherine was never informed, 
that could not be pleaded against her; for any declaration, 
however solemn, was done away with by the subsequent 
celebration of the marriage itself. It is extremely absurd 
now, after the marriage has taken place, to object that 

1 Ad Yitel. Ep. 72. " Quare Salo- 2 I Kings viii. u. 
mon et Achaz tmdecim annorum 3 See above, p. 5, note 2 ; and also 
nlios genuisse dicantur." p. 56, note i. 


Henry at one time declared he should not many Cather 
ine. He did say so, but then he married her. "We must 
rely on the notorious fact, not on a secret declaration, 
and that more especially as the fact is both later in 
point of time, and a sacrament of Christ, confessed and 
ratified by the intercourse of so many years, and the 
birth of children. 

They say that Henry being then a youth, could not 
have had any thoughts about peace; but why should they 
deny that he was capable of good thoughts and of holy 
desires, when about twelve years of age and close upon 
manhood ? Certainly he was able to do wrong, and might 
have been found legally guilty of most grievous crimes. 
He might commit murder, and deserve everlasting death ; 
and yet he was incapable of thinking of the public good, 
or of those things which belong to everlasting life ! It 
is a foolish and impious opinion, condemned by good 
manners, and put aside by just laws ; upright judges 
will not accept it, even if one were to bring forward 
witnesses and records to prove it. Besides, if the child 
had no wish to preserve the public peace, the father, in 
whose control he was, had ; and he had that wish in his 
interest, as he had believed, on his behalf, when he pro 
cured the sacrament of faith for him, being still an 

"When the Pope granted the dispensation, he did not 
consider Isabella of Spain and Henry of England as 
private persons, but as public and royal persons with 
public and royal duties, which did not come to an end 
with their lives, but which passed on to their heirs, 
Henry VIII. and Catherine, together with the right to 
the crown of England. Peace is not the good of certain 
persons only, but rather of the whole community. The 
people and the state do not die. We go further. It is 
enough for us that Henry and Isabella were alive when 


the dispensation was obtained, for matters of grace, the 
moment they are granted, derive their strength and 
completeness from the sole will of the grantor. At the 
same time we must not forget that the Catholic king- 
Ferdinand was living when the marriage itself took 

The children, themselves, it is said, did not authorise 
their parents to seek this dispensation ; be it so, that is 
nothing to the purpose. The Pope may if he likes 
reject a petition presented to him on behalf of another, 
when it does not appear that the person presenting it 
has authority to do so ; nevertheless, if he does not reject 
it, and grants the prayer, the grant is valid, and no 
further question can be raised concerning the person who 
presented it, but only whether the grant has been made. 
This applies with greater force to parents when they pre 
sent petitions on behalf of their children. The law of 
nature itself teaches parents to lay up treasures for their 
children, and kings especially observe this law and 
custom, being wont to obtain through their ambassadors 
many graces for their children. 

Nor is there any false statement in the clause, "a 
petition was lately presented to Us on your behalf." A 
petition was really presented according to the statement, 
on behalf of Henry and Catherine, for it is certain that 
all that was asked for tended wholly to their advantage. 
It can never be admitted that parents, to whom God has 
given their children, are without any authority from 
their children when acting in matters concerning their 
children s good, for the very existence of their children 
and nature itself is a perpetual cry unto parents to do all 
they can for the good of their children ; "for if any one 
cares not for his own, especially those of his house, he 
has denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." 

1 i Tim. v. 8. 


Let us now go to the last point in wliicli our opponents 
think their greatest strength lies. In the petition pre 
sented to the Pope are the following words : " Some time 
ago a marriage had taken place between the lady 
Catherine and prince Arthur, the brother of Henry." 
Well, is not the impediment of public decency set forth 
with sufficient distinctness, seeing that it springs from 
the mere contract itself? Then we have in the same 
petition this clause : " The marriage was perhaps con 
summated." Does not this expression set forth the 
impediment of affinity ? The word " perhaps " was 
brought in for the purpose of making the marriage valid 
under all conditions, even if the first marriage had been 
complete, which in truth it never was. 

When the Pope saw the facts were before him 
that at the utmost there were but two things that stood 
in the way of the marriage of Henry and Catherine the 
former marriage with Arthur the brother, and the possi 
bility of its having been perfected, when the Pope, I 
say, with the full knowledge of the case, removed, by 
his own authority, not only the impediment of affinity 
generally, but also that of the special affinity which 
might have subsisted between Henry and Catherine, did 
he not also at the same time remove the impediment . of 
public decency which springs from the contract alone ? 
For if Henry was allowed to marry the widow of his 
brother the consummation of the marriage notwith 
standing how much more easy it was to allow him to 
do so, when the marriage was only celebrated and not 
completed. Thus spoke the lawyers of the queen. 

The king s lawyers now alleged certain slight pre 
sumptions, when this question of the completed marriage 
was raised, in favour thereof, and maintained that the 
word " perhaps" was superfluous. They spoke of the 
youth of Arthur and Catherine, their supping together, 


their being shown late at night into their chamber, of 
their great love for each other, of the celebration of the 
marriage publicly, and finally alleged certain words said 
to have been uttered by the prince in jest the day after, 
as tending to prove that which the lawyers maintained 
to be a fact. 

On the other hand, the queen s lawyers brought many 
and most strong reasons against these presumptions. 
In the first place, Henry VII., on account of the illness 
of the prince at the time, had placed him and Catherine 
under the charge of a discrete matron ; and secondly, her 
most serene highness the queen herself had deponed 
upon oath, 1 in the presence of John Talcarne, public 
notary, before many bishops and other witnesses, that 
the marriage had never been completed ; and again, when 
the queen had repeated her declaration in court publicly, 
in the presence of the king himself, Henry did not 
contradict her, and in so grave a matter it must be 
taken for granted that the king assented to the state 
ment which he did not deny. 

In addition to this allegation of the lawyers, let us 
give also a remarkable proof taken from a book of Car 
dinal Pole, written in the lifetime of Henry, and dedi 
cated to him. In that book the Cardinal declared that 
Henry, at the time not dreaming of a divorce, admitted 
of his own accord to the emperor Charles V. that the 
statement of the queen was true. 2 

Again, the king s lawyers produced a letter of Car 
dinal Adrian, formerly the Papal collector in England, 

1 This she did Nov. 7, 1528, at has been reprinted from a rare book, 

Bridewell, in the presence of the by Mr. Pocock, Records, ii. p. 431. 

archbishop of Canterbury, William 2 Pro Eccles. Unitatis Defens., 

Warham ; Cuthbert Tunstall, bishop lib. iii. c. iii. " Tibi autem, princeps, 

of London ; John Clerk, bishop of an credis ? Si credis tu ipse hoc 

Bath and Wells ; John Fisher, bishop fassus es, virginem te accepisse ; et 

of Rochester ; and Henry Standish, Cscsari fassus es, cui minime expe- 

bishop of St. Asaph. The record of diebat, si turn de divortio cogitares, 

the act, attested by John Talcarne, hoc fateri. 


in which the Cardinal said that he heard Pope Julius 
declare his inability to grant the dispensation for the 
marriage of Henry and Catherine. 

But the queen s lawyers produced in court a letter of 
the Pope on the subject written to Henry VII. at his 
request. In that letter were the following words : 
" As for the dispensation, We have never refused it, nor 
have We given any occasion for any one to suspect that 
We shall refuse it, as some persons have said, but not 
according to truth. But Our answer has been that We 
are waiting for a more favourable opportrmity for grant 
ing it, in order that it may be made with more mature 
deliberation for the honour of the parties whom it con 
cerns as well as for that of the Holy See." 1 

The lawyers who undertook the defence of her most 
serene highness the queen were the greatest and most 
learned men in England. Foremost among them was 
William Warham, 2 the archbishop of Canterbury, ac 
companied by five bishops Cuthbert Tunstall, 3 then of 
London, afterwards of Durham ; Nicolas West 4 of 
Ely ; John Clerk 5 of Bath and Wells ; John Fisher 6 of 

1 The letter is to be seen in Her- of the Eolls in 1516 ; keeper of the 
"bert, p. 275 ; and in Poeock, Re- Privy Seal in 1523. He was conse- 
cords, i. p. 5, a fuller copy, taken crated bishop of London October 19, 
from the Record Office. 1522, and translated to Durham 

2 William Warham, educated at March 25, 1530. He deserted the 
Winchester and New College, Ox- queen, and went over to the side of 
ford, where he took his degree in the king. 

law. He was one of the lawyers of 4 See note, p. 9. 

the Court of Arches. In 1494 he 5 John Clerk, a Cambridge doctor, 

was made master of the Rolls ; con- archdeacon of Colchester October 

secrated bishop of London Septem- 22, 1519, and dean of Windsor in 

ber 25, 1502. Pope Julius II. the following month. He was made 

translated him, December 29,1503, also master of the Rolls in Oct. 1522, 

to the church of Canterbury. and in Rome, Dec. 6, 1523, accord- 

3 Cuthbert Tunstall studied in ing to Mr. Stubbs, consecrated 
Oxford, Cambride, and Padua ; vicar- bishop of Bath and Wells, 
general of archbishop Warham in 6 John Fisher, educated at the 
1508 ; ordained priest in 1511, and grammar school of his native place, 
made judge of the Prerogative Court, Beverley, in the East Riding of 
then archdeacon of Chester ; master Yorkshire, and afterwards at Cam- 

CHAP. X.] 


Kochester ; and Henry Standish 1 of St. Asaph. Four 
others, theologians, were added to these, namely, Abel, 2 
Fetherston, 3 Powell, 4 and Ridley. 5 

bridge, was elected chancellor of 
the university in 1504, and Nov. 
24th of the same year was conse 
crated bishop of Kochester. 

1 Henry Standish, a native of 
Lancashire, and a Franciscan friar, 
provincial of his order, and conse 
crated at Oxford, July n, 1519, 
bishop of St. Asaph. Though he 
pleaded for the queen now, never 
theless, in the Convocation House, 
where he was not an advocate but 
a judge, he gave sentence for the 
king in favour of the divorce. 
Wharton, Hist, de Episcopis Assa- 
vens., p. 358. 

2 Thomas Abel, M.A., Oxford, 
was one of the queen s chaplains, 
and by her presented to the rectory 

of Brad well-near-the- Sea, in Essex. 
He suffered martyrdom July 30, 

3 Richard Fetherston wrote a 
book against the divorce, and suf 
fered martyrdom July 30, 1 540. 

4 Edward Powell, born in Wales, 
fellow of Oriel College. He was 
rector of Bleadon, Somersetshire, in 
1501, prebendary of Lincoln and of 
Sarum. He wrote against Luther 
as well as against the divorce, and 
in 1540 was martyred in Smithfield. 

5 Ridley, Cavendish s Life of Wol- 
sey, p. 213. "There was also an 
other ancient doctor, called, as I re 
member, Dr. Ridley, a very small 
person in stature, but surely a great 
and an excellent clerk in divinity." 



THEN, when all the arrangements had been made which 
are necessary for the discussion of questions of the eccle 
siastical law, John Fisher, bishop of Rochester, stood 
forth. 1 He was the light not of England only but of 
Christendom, a model of holiness, the salt of the people, 
and a doctor of the Church. He presented to the Le 
gates a book he had written and a most learned book 
it is in defence of the marriage, addressing them at 
the same time with great gravity, and warning them 
against searching for difficulties where none existed, or 
allowing either the plain truths of Scripture, or the laws 
of the Church, which in this matter were abundantly 
clear, to be set aside. Still further, he begged them to 
consider carefully the great mischief likely to follow 
upon the divorce ; the enmity between Henry and the 
emperor Charles and the princes who took their part ; 
wars, not foreign only but civil ; and, worse than all, 
dissensions in matters of belief, schism, heresies, and 
sects innumerable. " As for myself," said the bishop, 
" as I have taken great pains in the matter, I am bold 
enough to say, and I have not only proved it clearly in 
my book, on the authority of the Scriptures and of the 

1 June 2 8 tli, when the fifth session of the court was held. Theiner, 585. 


holy Fathers, but I am also ready to seal my testimony 
with my life s blood, that there is no power on earth 
that can break the bond of this marriage, which God 
Himself has made." 

When the bishop of Rochester, who was a man 
famous for his learning, remarkable for his holy life, 
deserving all honour on account of his episcopal dignity, 
and for his grey hairs venerable, had thus spoken, four 
doctors of canon and civil law produced a book they 
had written, and in which they had made it plain that 
the marriage of Henry and Catherine had been duly 
contracted according to the laws of the Church. Then 
three books were produced, each written by a bishop, 
namely, Clerk, bishop of Bath and Wells; Cuthbert 
Tunstall, bishop of London, 2 but at the time in Cambrai 
with Sir Thomas More on the business of the king ; and 
Nicolas West, bishop of Ely. 

After the bishops came the four theologians, Abel, 
Powell, Fetherston, and Ridley, who declared that, 
moved by the love of God and the truth, they had said 
nothing in defence of the marriage but that which they 
knew, to the best of their knowledge, to be in agreement 
with the gospel and the sacred writings ; the judges 
themselves would admit it to be so, if they would con 
descend to read, as no doubt they would, the books they 
had written. 

1 Theiner, Moimmenta, p. 585. tenuit omnem personam in admira- 

The bishop on the 29th of June tione." 

appeared in court, and said he 2 Pocock, Records of the Refor- 

was bound in the interests of truth, mation, ii. p. 571. Tunstall after- 

"per dirli, affermarli et con vive wards abandoned the cause of the 

ragioni dimostrarli che hoc matri- queen, and even told her so, when 

monium regis et reginse nulla po- he, with the archbishop of York, 

testate hurnana vel divina potest on the part of the king, pressed her 

dissolvi, pro qua sententia asseruit to accept the sentence which Cran- 

etiam se animam positurum . . . mer had pronounced. " I had now 

et in fine obtulit libellum a se changed my former opinion, and ex- 

conscriptum super hac re. ... horted her to do the semblable, and 

Questa cosa di Roffense fu inex- not to usurp any more the name of 

pectata et improvista, et pero a queen." 


But Eidley, a sound and devout Catholic, to whom all 
flattery was hateful, complained in open court of the 
injustice of the Legates, who had exacted an oath of the 
queen s lawyers, and of the queen s lawyers only, that 
they would neither say, nor write, nor do anything in 
the cause otherwise than in strict accordance with the 
ecclesiastical laws. "For," said he, "if the like oath 
had been exacted of the king s lawyers, the process 
would have been already ended, and our opponents 
would not have denied that the truth is on our side. He 
would suffer any punishment they pleased if the king s 
lawyers, on being compelled to take such an oath, did 
not range themselves on the side of the queen." All the 
king s lawyers held their peace, and by their silence 
seemed to confess the truth of his words. Wolsey, in a 
most unseemly manner, resented the freedom with which 
Eidley spoke. 1 Neither he nor Cardinal Campeggio saw 
his way to go on with the cause, for the proofs of the 
validity of the marriage were all so clear and beyond 
doubt. Nevertheless, the king, as usual, was pressing 
them to pronounce sentence at once in his favour. 
Cardinal Campeggio then seeing that anything he could 
say would have no weight with the king, and not ven 
turing in the face of evidence so clear, against the 
undoubted will of the Pope, and in spite of Catherine s 
appeal, to pronounce the sentence which the king de 
manded, at last spoke out with courage and freedom, 
and said that he had been a lawyer for many years, and 
for many years one of the twelve judges of the Eota in 

i Cavendish, Life of Card. Wolsey, be rehearsed. What, quoth my 
p. 224. " Then, quoth one Doctor Lord Cardinal, Doniine Doctor, ma- 
Ridley, f it is a shame and a great gis reverenter ? No, no, my lord, 
dishonour to this honourable pre- quoth he, there belongeth no re- 
sence, that any such presumptions verence to be given to these abom- 
should be alleged in this open inable presumptions, for an unre- 
court, which be to all good and verent tale would be unreverently 
honest men most detestable to answered. " 


Borne, but had never known such hurry before, not even 
in matters of little moment, still less in a cause so 
weighty and important as this. Besides, the custom is, 
when the cause is ready for sentence, to leave the 
judges thirty clear days to weigh the arguments and the 
evidence ; but in this, so many days have hardly gone 
by since the cause has been publicly pleaded. And 
what a cause ! how important ! How much scandal and 
trouble are sure to come out of it, unless, indeed, any 
one thinks that the sudden rupture of a lawful engage 
ment, the hurried dissolution of a marriage which has 
been held valid for twenty years, the wretched bastar 
dising of a noble and even royal issue, the provocation 
offered to a most powerful monarch, the sowing of dis 
cord among Christians, the contempt of the Papal power 
of dispensation, to be matters of little or no moment. 
He was resolved, for his part, to proceed not in hurry and 
haste, but slowly and safely, in so grave a question. 

When Campeggio had spoken, men betrayed their 
astonishment in their countenances. Some were glad be 
cause he had spoken so clearly ; others, on the contrary, 
were very much grieved, for they hoped to rise in the 
world by means of these disturbances. Some, however, 
were secretly glad, but pretended to be sorry, among 
whom was Cardinal Wolsey, who, though he was sup 
posed to agree with Campeggio, nevertheless pressed for 
the delivery of the sentence without delay. 

Campeggio would not pronounce any sentence, and 
suggested daily new reasons for delay; he also length 
ened the process, contrary to all expectation, so that 
when the end of the month of July had come he an 
nounced that it was the custom in Eome for the courts 
there to be closed till the month of October. 1 When the 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, the Legates made no great haste, and 
bk. ii. p. 107, Eyston MS. "But Campegius pretended cause why they 


[BOOK i. 

king saw this lie sent the dukes of Norfolk l and Suffolk 2 
to the Legates. The two dukes, attended by many noble 
men, presented themselves before the Legates during the 
sitting of the court on the 3oth of July, and then, in 
their own and in the king s behalf, very urgently re 
quired the Legates to keep the king s conscience no longer 
in doubt, and to put an end to the cause by a definite 
and final sentence. Wolsey, however, though he was the 
first in the commission, held his tongue, for he was very 
much alarmed. But Campeggio declared that he was 
bound to be true to God and to the Koman Church, the 
custom of which was, in the court of which he was a 
member, to carry on no lawsuits between the end of July 
and the 4th day of October. Anything done in disregard 

could not proceed until October fol 
lowing, whereof the king hearing 
complained to the dukes of Norfolk 
and Suffolk, and other nobles of his 
council, which noblemen were in 
hand with the Legates, sitting the 
3oth day of July, that day or the next 
to give final sentence in the matter. 
Campegius swore on his honour and 
faith that he bore to the Church of 
Rome, that the course of the courts 
there is, at the end of July to sus- 

Ssnd all matters till the 4th day of 
ctober, and that all judgments given 
in the mean season were void; where 
fore he required the king to bear with 
him until that day before the which 
they could sit no more trusting that 
then they should make an end to the 
king s contentation. The which an 
swer did greatly offend the noblemen, 
and the duke of Suffolk giving a great 
clap on the table with his hand, did 
swear that there never was Cardinal 
that did good in England, and forth 
with departed in great anger, with 
the residue of the nobility." 

1 Thomas Howard, duke of Nor 
folk, succeeded his father A.D. 1524, 
and complied with all the measures 
of the king; nevertheless, he was im 
prisoned and attainted in 1546, and 

from the Tower wrote a letter to the 
king (Herbert, p. 630), in which he 
said, " As for all causes of religion, 
I say now, and have said to your 
majesty and many others, I do know 
you to be a prince of such virtue and 
knowledge, that whatsoever laws you 
have in times past made, or hereafter 
shall make, I shall to the extremity 
of my power stick unto them as long 
as my life shall last." At the same 
time he begged the Peers that he 
"might have a ghostly father" sent 
to him, and that he "might receive" 
his " Maker." But also, in the same 
petition (Herbert, p. 631), is this: 
" Licence to send to London to buy 
one book of St. Austin, De civitate 
Dei/ and of Josephus, De Antiquita- 
tibus, and another of Sabellicus, who 
doth declare most of any book that I 
have read how the bishop of Rome 
from time to time hath usurped his 
power against all princes, by their 
unwise sufferance." If the king had 
lived a few hours longer, the duke 
would have been executed. He was 
left in the Tower during the reign 
of Edward, and set free by queen 

2 Charles Brandon. See note at 
the end of chapter v. of book ii. 


of that custom would have no legal force whatever. If, 
however, the king will have patience till then, every 
thing, no doubt, will be as he desired. The two dukes 
again insisted on the immediate delivery of the sentence, 
either then or at the utmost on the following day. Cam- 
peggio again replied that he could not do it. Thereupon 
Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, striking the table with 
great violence, cried out, " By the Holy Mass, no Car 
dinal or Legate ever brought any good to England." 
Whether it was a sudden fit of fury, or a mean desire to 
flatter the king, that moved him to speak thus, we know 
not, but certain it is, that by means of the king and his 
children, but above all by the offspring of the marriage 
which they so much desired, God did punish these noble 
men for their pride and flatteries : witness those cala 
mities which afterwards overtook them and their families. 
The two dukes quitted the court in great wrath and 
indignation, and the king, already inflamed by passion, 
became still more furious at their instigation. But in 
the meantime the Pope had allowed the appeal of the 
queen, which was founded on justice, 1 and having pub 
licly forbade Wolsey and Campeggio to meddle further 
with the cause, referred it to Paul Capisucchi, auditor of 
causes in the Sacred Apostolic Palace, and dean, with 
instructions to examine the question and report thereon 
to him. The auditor was also directed to appoint a day 
for the trial, and to summon the king and queen, by 

1 The queen s lawyers had lodged the king as I would for myself ; . . . 

their appeal in Rome, and as soon as but in this case I cannot satisfy his 

it came before the Pope, there was desire, but that I should do mani- 

nothing to be done but to call up the festly against justice, to the charge of 

cause out of the hands of the Legal es. my conscience, to my rebuke, and to 

Dr. Bennet, the king s agent in Rome, the dishonour of the See Apostolic, 

writes thence to Cardinal Wolsey, ... he cannot of justice deny it." 

July 9, to inform him that the Pope The Cardinal and the king laboured 

is about to supersede him. Burnet, with all their strength to deprive the 

iv. 123, ed. Pocock. Dr. Bennet re- queen of the means of defence which 

presents the Pope as saying, "God is the law allowed her, namely, to 

ui y judge : I would do as gladly for appeal unto the Pope. 


their attorneys duly appointed, to plead before him. 
This decree 1 of the Pontiff was published not only in 
Eome, but also in Bruges and Tournai, as well as in other 
churches of the neighbourhood in Flanders. It was also 
sent to her most serene highness the queen, that she 
might bring it to the knowledge of the king and the 

The queen sent to the king Sir Thomas More, 2 an illus 
trious member of the House of Commons, famous for his 
natural gifts, his piety and learning. Sir Thomas was 
to say that the Pope had withdrawn from the Legates 
their commission, and had summoned him and the 
queen to plead by their attorneys in the court of the 
Bota, and that she sent word of this to the king for the 
purpose of learning from him whether he wished the 
summons to be sent him by an officer of the court or not. 

The king s annoyance was very great, but as he had 
not had time to consider the matter, he concealed his 
vexation, and told Sir Thomas More that all this had 
been known to him for some time ; he did not wish 
to have the summons served upon himself in person, 
but he would not hinder its being served on the Legates 
in the usual way ; he was very much pleased that the 
cause was to be tried in a place which belonged to the 
queen as much as to himself, and he would do his 
utmost to have it settled in Eome. 

So he spoke, but he hoped to bring about, by means 
of fresh ambassadors to the Pope, the renewal of the 
commission of the Legates, and so he submitted with 
the less repugnance to that which had been done. 

After this, many of the queen s lawyers, but only one 

1 Published by Le Grand, iii. 446, in the city of London, A.D. 1480, and 
and in Tierney s Dod, i. 366. educated at Cambridge. He became 

2 Sir Thomas More, son of Sir John a lawyer, and was made chancellor 
More, puisne justice of the Com- of the duchy of Lancaster, and on 
mon Pleas, was born in Mill Street, the fall of Wolsey, chancellor. 


of the king s, went, with two notaries, to announce to 
the Legates that their powers had been recalled. They 
were then in the country together, about twelve miles 
out of London. 1 The lawyer sent by the king at the 
same time 2 declared in the presence of them all that 
the king wished nothing further to be done in England, 
all the pleadings would be carried on in Eome. The 
Legates respected the Papal order, and hopes were en 
tertained that the king would listen to better counsels, 
when Campeggio received letters from the Pope order 
ing him to return to Eome immediately. 

Then the king, for the first time losing all hopes that 
the question would be decided in his favour, burned with 
unutterable rage, and throwing the blame of the whole 
process deservedly upon Wolsey, who was the original 
cause of it, showed in unmistakable ways that he 
meant to do him a mischief. Many of the chief per 
sonages observing this they had long regarded Wolsey 
with envious eyes, for his will was supreme in the 
administration of the state took counsel together, and 
drew up very grave charges against him, which they 
reduced to writing, signed, and presented to the king. 3 
The king showed them that he was pleased. Meanwhile, 
however, he concealed his purpose until Campeggio 
should have left the country, which he did September 
7, 4 and had his baggage searched by order of the king. 

1 At the Moor, a house belonging offences as they knew by him, and 
to the abbey of St. Alban s, and all their accusations were written in 
which Wolsey inhabited as the abbot a book, and all their hands set to it, 
of that monastery. Theiner, p. 587. to the number of thirty-and-four, 

2 The notice was served on the two which book they presented to the 
Cardinals Sept. 6, 1529. Theiner, king." 

p. 587. 4 Sept. 7 may have been the day 

3 Hall, p. 759. " When the nobles on which the Cardinal s departure 
and prelates perceived that the king s was fixed ; he did not leave London 
favour was from the Cardinal sore before October 5. He crossed the 
minished, every man of the king s Channel October 26. Theiner, p. 
council began to lay to him such 588. 


That search was made chiefly for the purpose of 
seizing any letters of Wolsey s ; none, however, were 
found. 1 

But Wolsey, knowing nothing of that which had 
been contrived against him, had gone to the king, then 
staying in a place near St. Alban s, where, with him and 
his council, he discussed many things that would have 
to be done in the trial to be held in Eome. Stephen 
Gardiner 2 was also there, one of the king s secretaries, 
who knowing himself to be suspected of having been 
the cause of the divorce, asked Wolsey openly to declare 
in the interests of truth, publicly before the king and the 
council, who they were who had been the first movers 
in the matter. " I will never deny," said Wolsey, "that 
I alone have done it ; 3 and I am so far from regretting 
it, that if it had not been begun, I would have it begun 
now." These latter words, everybody understood, were 
meant for the king. Though he certainly was the first 
Avho raised the question, yet, when he saw the king s 
passion for Anne Boleyn, the man who loved the glory 
of men more than the glory of God, was sorry for the 
counsel he had given, when it was no longer in his power 
to undo it. At that time, however, the king remained 

1 The officers of the customs (see Dr. Bennet would take his place. 
Chapuys , the Spanish Ambassador s, Theiner, pp. 563, 585. He was 
letter, Oct. 25, 1 529, Pocock, Records, secretary July 28, 1 529, as he writes 
ii. 69) asked the Cardinal to open himself to Vannes. Pocock, Ke- 
his baggage for their inspection, and cords, i. p. 265. 

then, on his refusal, broke the locks 3 The French ambassador, writing 

themselves. When they had done from London, October 21, 1528, says 

their work, he told them they were that the Cardinal had urged the 

silly people to suppose that he who divorce for reasons of his own, it 

had not been corrupted by the many seems, and not because the marriage 

presents of the king, could be bought of Henry and Catherine was unlaw- 

by Cardinal Wolsey. ful. Le Grand, iii. 186. " Les pre- 

2 He returned to England from miers termes du divorce ont este mis 
Rome, June 24, 1529; the king had par luy en avant, afin de mettre 
written to the Pope, May 20, to say perpetuelle separation entre les mai- 
that he had recalled him, and that sons d Angleterre et de Bourgogne." 



But after the departure of Campeggio, when Wolsey 
went again to resume his attendance at court, the king 
refused to speak to him. He then saw that the king 
was unfriendly. Not long after that, he was arrested, at 
the king s command, by Thomas duke of Norfolk, and 
compelled to resign, first the chancellorship, 1 which 
was given without delay to the illustrious Sir Thomas 
More, and next the see of Winchester, which Stephen 
Gardiner accepted at the king s hands. He had 
built himself a magnificent palace, York House, 2 and 
this too the king seized with all its furniture. 3 
Lastly, he was stripped of almost all his goods, 4 and 

1 "Wolsey, says Cavendish, " when 
the Term began, went to the hall in 
suchlike sort and gesture as he was 
wont most commonly to do, and satin 
the Chancery, being chancellor. After 
which day he never sat there more." 
The dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk 
demanded of him the great seal, 
which he at first refused to sur 
render, but in the end he gave it up. 

2 York House was hardly furnished 
when the Cardinal was deprived of 
it. In a letter of Fox to Gardiner, 
May 12, 1528 (Pocock, Records, i. 
145), we read thus: "The hall of 
York Place, with other edifices here, 
being now in building, my lord s 
grace, intending most sumptuously 
and gorgeously to repair and furnish 
the same." "The king" (Pocock, 
Records, ii. 68) " went to see his new 
wealth with Anne Boleyn and her 
mother secretly from Greenwich, 
and found the treasure surpassed his 

3 The Prevarication of the Church s 
Liberties, chap. iii. s. 2, Eyston MS. 
" For immediately after queen 
Catherine s appeal in the twenty-first 
year of his reign, he fell first upon 
York House, the ancient London seat 
of the archbishops of York, by the 
attainder of the Cardinal Wolsey in 
a prsemunire who for his own 
private ends was the first author 

of scrupling the king s conscience 
about his marriage with queen 
Catherine and compelled the Car 
dinal before a judge of record to 
acknowledge the same being then 
by him most sumptuously built and 
furnished to be the king s right, 
and called it Whitehall. Then in 
the twenty-second year he took the 
hospital of St. James into his hands, 
together with all the meadows and 
pastures thereunto belonging, as com 
modious for his house of Whitehall, 
made a park thereof, built a fair 
palace thereon, and enclosed all with 
in a brick wall." 

4 Cardinal Wolsey, Oct. 22, 1529, 
confessed himself" guilty of the 
charges laid against him by the king 
touching the statutes of pro visors and 
prsemunire, and that "he deserved 
perpetual imprisonment at the king s 
will, and to forfeit to the king for 
ever all his lands, tenements, offices, 
fees, pensions, annuities, goods, and 
chattels which he has or may have ; 
in consideration of which offences he 
grants to the king all his said pos 
sessions, with all the revenues aris 
ing from his archbishopric of York, 
bishopric of Winchester, abbey of St. 
Alban s, and his other spiritual bene 
fices and promotions. 5 Chronol. Cat. 
of materials for the new edition of 
the Foadera, p. 168. 


banished at first to Esher, 1 then sent to his diocese of 
York. 2 

1 Esher was a house of the bishop bear him with my teeth. Therefore 
of Winchester, and at this time be- I would advise him to prepare him 
longed to the Cardinal as bishop of away as shortly as he can, or else he 
that see. shall be sent forward. " Chapuys, 

2 Cavendish, p. 298. "My lord writing to the emperor from London, 
of Norfolk said to Master Cromwell, Feb. 6, 1^30 (Pocock, Records, ii. 
* Sir/ quoth he, methinketh that 76), says that the duke of Norfolk, 
the Cardinal your master maketh on hearing that the Cardinal hoped 
no haste northward; show him that to return to the court, " commencat 
if he go not away shortly, I will, tr&s fort a jurer, que avant que souf- 
rather than he should tarry still, frir cela, il le mangeroit tout vif." 

( 77) 



WHO would not imagine that the king would have 
wished now to abandon his evil purpose? But be 
astonished, heavens, upon this! 1 The very sin for 
which he punishes "Wolsey so severely is the very sin in 
which the king obstinately persists. Therefore, king, 
art thou inexcusable ; for wherein thou judgest another 
thou condemnest thyself, for we know that the judgment 
of God is according to truth against those who do such 
things. 2 

Now the king, on the one hand, sends certain men- 
one of them being Thomas Cranmer, 3 afterwards arch- 

1 Jerem. ii. 12. 

2 Rom. ii. i, 2. 

3 Cranmer, a native of Northamp 
tonshire, was educated at Cambridge, 
and became a fellow of Jesus Col 
lege. He forfeited his fellowship 
because, according to Strype, "he 
married a gentleman s daughter ; " 
but according to Harps held, who 
had better means of knowing the 
facts, she was "a wanton maid at 
the sign of the Dolphin, that was 
wont to set young scholars their 
breakfast. ... It chanced not long 
after that she died, and then became 
he a priest, and afterwards chaplain 
to Thomas earl of Wiltshire, father 
to the lady Anne Bulleyne, at the 
time that the king went about to 
make a divorce with queen Ka- 

therine, of the which matter the 
earl had oft talk with the said 
Cranmer, who was very forward to 
help forth the said divorce." 

In the answers to the interroga 
tories ministered to him at Oxford, 
in the reign of Mary, we have these 
facts confessed by him, according to 
Foxe, viii. 58 : " That he, the 
aforesaid Thomas Cranmer, being 
free, and before he entered into 
holy orders, married one Joan 
Black or Brown, dwelling at the 
sign of the Dolphin, in Cambridge. 
Whereupon he [Cranmer] answered 
that whether she were called Black 
or Brown he knew not, but that he 
married there one Joan, that he 
granted. 2. That after the death of 
the aforesaid wife, he entered into 


[BOOK i. 

bishop of Canterbury to plead his cause in Eome ; on 
the other hand, searches throughout all France for theo 
logians and lawyers to maintain in writing that his 
marriage with Catherine was invalid. His object in this 
proceeding was that he might be able to dazzle men s 
eyes by a show of authority, that of universities, on his 
side, if, as seemed most probable, the Pope should pro 
nounce against him. The king meant to produce, in 
the name of the universities as if so many bodies of 
most learned men were ranged on his side the opinions 
of a very few men therein, and they not only not the 

holy orders, and after that was made 
archbishop "by the Pope. He re 
ceived, he said, a certain Bull of the 
Pope, which he delivered unto the 
king, and was archbishop by him. 
3. "item, That he, being in holy 
orders, married another woman as 
his second wife, named Anne, and 
so was twice married. To this he 
granted. 4. Item, In the time of 
Henry VIII. he kept the said wife 
secretly, and had children by her. 
Hereunto he also granted, affirming 
that it was better for him to have 
his own than to do like other priests, 
holding and keeping other men s 
wives. 5. Item, In the time of 
King Edward he brought out the 
said wife openly, affirming and pro 
fessing the same to be his wife. He 
denied not but he so did, and law 
fully might do the same, forasmuch 
as the laws of the realm did so 
permit him. 6. Item, That he 
shamed not openly to glory himself 
to have had his wife in secret many 
years. And though he so did, he 
said, there was no cause why he 
should be ashamed thereof." He 
was archdeacon of Taunton in 1525, 
and in Italy on the affair of the 
divorce in the beginning of 1528, 
Foxe (viii. 6) says that Cranmer was 
the person who advised the king to 
consult the universities and learned 

men abroad, and Strype adopts the 
story. But Dr. Fiddes (Life of 
Wolsey, p. 444) shows that this de 
vice had been suggested before the 
trial, see Cavendish, p. 207. Nor 
can it be true that the king heard of 
Cranmer for the first time in August 
1529, according to Foxe and Strype, 
seeing that he was chaplain to Sir 
Thomas Boleyn, and actively pro 
moting the divorce for at least 
eighteen months previously. 

Cardinal Campeggio, writing from. 
London, June 4, 1529, says that he 
had heard rumours to the effect that 
the theologians of Paris were to be 
consulted; and Harpsfield (Treatise of 
Marriage, bk. ii. p. 96) says, " There 
were in the meanwhile sent by the 
king divers learned persons some 
to Italy, some to France, and among 
others I)r. Stokesley and Dr. Fox ; 
some into Germany, as the bishop of 
Hereford to learn and know the 
censure and judgment as well of pri 
vate men as of whole universities." 
This took place before the arrival 
of the Legate, and even before the 
Legate was appointed. " My lord 
Eochefort s priest" was in Italy 
in the beginning of 1528, carrying 
letters of the king, and busy in 
the affair of the divorce. See 
Pocock, Kecords, i. 57. 



most learned, but for the most part corrupted by royal 
bribery. 1 

This affair was at first placed in the hands of Eeginald 
Pole, 2 whose noble birth vied with his honourable life 
and admirable learning, and afterwards in those of Wil 
liam Langey, a Frenchman. 3 But when Pole would not 
meddle in so foul a matter, 4 Langey, 5 preferring the 
king s money to his own reputation, brought over to his 
side all the poor lawyers and theologians he could. 

Pedro Fernandez, a Brazilian bishop, 6 was at this time 

1 Harpsfield, bk. ii. p. 152. " I 
have heard a doctor and countryman 
of our own, that said he was joined 
in commission beyond the seas with 
others about these affairs, report that 
mules were well laden with Eng 
lish angels that flew far and wide 
among the learned men of France 
and Italy." 

2 There is a letter of Pole in Po- 
cock, Eecords, i. 541, on the subject ; 
but he does not seem to have done 
anything more than inform the king 
of what the doctors of Paris had 
done. In his letter to Edward VI. 
he gives the same account of his 

3 Cardinal Pole, in his letter to 
Edward VI., sec. 12: " Itaque de- 
lata mihi res est, acldito collega 
Guillielmo Langeio, viro non tarn 
nobilitate qua pra3stabat, quam lit- 
teris claro." He then says that he 
escaped the danger of being involved 
in the affair of the divorce : " Hie 
non dicam quibus modis evaserim ne 
me ilia tempestas obrueret." Wil 
liam Langey was a brother of Du 
Bellay, bishop of Bayonne, after 
wards cardinal, and at this time the 
French ambassador in London. 

4 Harpsfield, bk. ii. p. 147, Eyston 
MS. " He modestly excused him 
self as one unmeet, for lack of learn 
ing and experience, for such a pur 
pose, neither yet could he with this 
answer quite rid his hands ; but yet 
he gained so much, which was some 
what to his contentation, that the 

king did associate unto him a col 
league, whom Mr. Poole was well 
content to suffer to despatch those 
affairs all alone, himself in the mean 
season remaining quiet and nothing 
intermeddling. Pole went to Paris 
on this business apparently in Oc 
tober 1529. See Le Grand, iii. 367. 

5 He seems to have been employed 
by the king as early as 1527, accord 
ing to Stow, who writes, p. 531 : 
"Monsieur de Langie was a gentle 
man greatly favoured, as well in the 
universities of Italy and Germany as 
in the universities of France, and 
brother to the Cardinal Bellay, then 
bishop of Paris. He was at that 
time travelled withal to procure the 
opinions and judgments of the doc 
tors and chief learned men, sub 
scribed with their hands and con 
firmed with their seals, of the chief 
universities, as of Paris, Orleans, and 
other of France, and of Padua, 
Vienna, and Bolonia in Italy, de 
claring by the same that the Pope 
could not dispense with the said 
marriage, as being by God s law pro 
hibited, which afterwards was pro 
cured by the said Mons. de Langie, 
travelling in person to every the 
said universities with the king of 
England s commission, who had the 
French king s letters of singular 
commendation to the uttermost aid 

6 Pedro Fernandez Sardinha ; he 
was the first bishop of Bahia, San 


in Paris. In the preface to the book of Alvarez Gomez 
on the marriage of the king of England with his 
brother s widow, which he wrote, he says that he was 
an eyewitness of the bribery then wrought in Henry s 
name in Paris. " Certain theologians," so he wrote, 
"debasing the Word of God and seeking the favour of 
men, corrupted by gifts and largesses of angelets l a 
coin well known among the English fell into the 
toils of Satan, and helped the king s faction, contrary to 
their own convictions. And I am not afraid to speak 
so plainly, for I have seen it with my own eyes." 

An attempt also was made, by a like profusion of 
money, but in vain, in the university of Cologne, to 
obtain a favourable opinion. Peter of Leyden 2 tells us 
of it ; and while he praises the theologians of that 
university for their rejection of the king s money, he 
does not hide from us that some other universities were 
guilty of the basest flattery. These are his words : 
" Nothing has undermined your integrity, weakened 
your authority, overcome your constancy. So lately, 
when a certain king, mighty and powerful, hoped by 
heavy sums of money to purchase the opinion he wished 
to obtain, your rejection of him and his gold made him 
sensible of the unconquerable resolution of your minds. 
It makes one ashamed to reflect on the opinions he 
obtained in the meantime, by fraud and bribery, from 
some other universities, though they were all in vain 
while you refused your assent. So high is your autho 
rity, and such is your candour and discretion." 

One, Croke, 3 indeed is spoken of as having spent pro- 

1 Angelet, a gold coin, worth Carthusianus," Cologne, 1535. The 
about five shillings. prior died in 1536. 

2 Petrus Blomevenna, born in 3 Kichard Croke, admitted scho- 
Leyden 1494, prior of the Carthu- lar of King s College, Cambridge, 
sians of Cologne, in his preface to April 4, 1506. Soon afterwards he 
the first volume of the " Commenta- migrated to Oxford, and then went 
ries on the Sentences of Dionysius abroad at the expense of Warhani, 



fusely the king s money in other countries, so that the 
pestilence attacked not only the universities of Paris, 
Orleans, Angers, Toulouse, and Bourges, but also those 
of Padua and Bologna. Cardinal Pole, 1 to whom all 
this was perfectly well known, bitterly bewails it, and 
says that he could not marvel enough at the folly of the 
king spending such heavy sums of money to brand him 
self with shame ; to make people believe that he had 
been for twenty years living in incest. 

Others I pass by who complained of these things ; 
even Sleidan, 2 who praises Anne Boleyn especially be 
cause she encouraged the heresy of Luther, says, never 
theless, that Henry had obtained the approval of his 
divorce not without suspicion of bribery. 

"Well, even in his own kingdom, Henry could get no 
theologians to say freely and without money that the 
divorce was just. 

archbishop of Canterbury, where he said, " If that in time I had been 

sufficiently furnished with money, 
albeit I have, beside this seal, pro 
cured unto your highness one hun 
dred and ten subscriptions, yet it 
had been nothing in comparison of 
that that I might easily and would 
have done." 

1 De Eccles. Unit. Defens., lib. 
iii. c. iii. " Ac primum in eo ipso 
quod modo retuli, cum sic auctor 
tuae infamiae esses, cum legates ad 
omnes provincias mitteres, ubi lit- 
terarum gymnasia esse scires, tit 

remained about twelve years, durin 
which time he visited Paris and 
Leipsic, where he was professor of 
Greek, as well as at Louvain after 
wards. He returned to Cambridge, 
and was made public orator in 1522, 
then professor of Greek, on the de 
parture of Erasmus. The king sent 
him to Italy in 1529 he being 
then tutor of the duke of Richmond 
where he procured the opinions of 
divers men in favour of the divorce. 
On his return in 1532, he was made 

canon of Christ Church of the first prseclarum hunc honoris tituluin re 
foundation. In 1545 he migrated to ferrent, te non scortatorium aut adul- 
Exeter College. He was vicar of teruni sed incestuosum contra legem 
Long Buckby in Northamptonshire, naturae per viginti annos fuisse. 
and died in London, 1558. Croke Potuitne aliquod magis contra nattt- 
says of his doings (Pocock, Records, ram accidere quam tit quispiam 
i. 404) : " I never gave any man one tanto studio, tantis suis sumptibus 
halfpenny afore I had his conclu- quantos tu fecisti hac tina de causa 
sion with your highness without perpetuae turpitudinis notam sibi et 
former prayer or promise of reward, labem imponendam curaret, pro qua 
for the same. . . . And, gracious si casu aliquo contracta esset eluen- 
lord, I have laid out in your high- da generosissimo quisque animo li- 
ness cause above five hundred benter mortem oppeteret." 

O <-1 1 1 TT i T~\ {* T T 

crowns." In a letter before this 
from Venice (Burnet, iv. 135) he 

2 Sleidan, Hist. Ref., lib. ix. p. 
1 70 of Bohun s Translation. 


Now, not to speak of Cambridge, where the king found 
more to favour him in some measure, it is certain that 
the common seal of the university of Oxford, often re 
fused with the general assent of its most learned men, 
was at last obtained partly by force and partly by fraud. 
Some eight men at the utmost assembled by stealth, and 
having broken the doors of the church in which the com 
mon affairs of the university were settled, and public 
documents were sealed, put the seal of the university to 
the letter drawn up in favour of the divorce. They 
said that they acted thus in the interests of the uni 
versity, for the king, if nobody gave him satisfaction, 
might become angry and destroy the university, abound 
ing as it was in every kind of learning. 1 

Many Englishmen also throughout the realm wrote 
in defence of the marriage of Henry and Catherine. 
Among those whose names I know were John bishop 
of Eochester, Eeginald Cardinal Pole, John Holyman, 2 

1 Lord Herbert of Cherbury, in his -unknown how oft it was denied, and 

Life of Henry VIII. , inserted a docu- that when all was done, all had not 

ment which he calls a " decree " of been obtained, partly some men had 

the university of Oxford, made April not shrunk out of the way for fear, 

4, 1 530 But Antony & Wood thus and the very opportunity of the time 

speaks of it (Annals, ii. 44) in a note: had not been purposely espied when 

" But upon my perusal of the Uni- such men were away as were known 

versity Register of Congregation and would gainsay the matter. It is not 

Convocation for that time, as also the unknown what a number of learned 

Register of the Acts of the Chancel- men did publicly in the universities 

lor s Court, I find no such act, which stand with the queen s marriage, as 

my lord Herbert produceth, inserted, Dr. Kirkam, Dr. Roper, Dr. Holy- 

therefore what he saith as to that man, Mr. Moreman, Mr. Bayne, with 

matter must be looked upon as false, divers others, of the which men and 

Such an act may be drawn up, but their doings many things might be 

not allowed to be registered, because here inserted worthy of observation 

it did not pass." and immortal remembrance." 

Harpsfield thus speaks (Treatise of 2 Born at Cuddington, Bucks, and 
Marriage, bk. ii. p. 141) : " It is not educated at Winchester. He became 
unknown how earnestly the proc- a fellow of New College, Oxford, in 
tors of both universities were la- 1512, and sometime afterwards a 
boured, and what rewards they had, Benedictine monk in Reading. Con- 
to travel and work with the convoca- secrated bishop of Bristol Nov. 18, 
tions of the said universities to get 1554 the only Catholic who sat in 
their consent and seal. And it is not that see he died Dec. 20, 1558. 


bishop of Bristol, Abel, 1 and those seven priests already 
mentioned. 2 

In Spain the marriage was defended by Francis 
Koyas, Alfonso de Virues, 3 Alfonso de Castro, and Sepul- 
veda; 4 in Portugal by Alvarez Gomez; in Germany by 
Cochlgeus ; 5 in Flanders by Louis de Schore ; 6 in France 
riot by many, it is true, but Eguinard Baron, 7 Francis 
Duarene, 8 and [Francis de] Connan 9 gave their opinions 
on the question; in Italy by the Cardinal Cajetan; 


1 Harpsfield, bk. ii. p. 131, Eyston 
MS. " In the mean season and the 
next year also, being the twenty- 
third of his reign, the queen s mar 
riage was defended as well in divers 
open sermons, as also by printed 
books, especially one made by Mr. 
Thos. Abel, the said queen s chap 

2 Chapter x. p. 67. 

3 Alfonso Ruiz de Virues, bishop 
of the Canary Islands, died in 1545. 

4 Johannes Genesius de Sepul- 

6 Harpsfield, Treatise, bk. ii. p. 
153, Eyston MS. "Our countryman 
Mr. Morison doth grievously inveigh 
against Cochlseus for that book, and 
fsaith that he did not write it for the 
zeal and love of justice and truth, 
but stirred up with malice, envy, and 
hatred against the king, and for other 
corrupt affections ; whose accusation 
the said Cochlaeus refuting, protest- 
eth, and most religiously sweareth 
and taketh God to witness, that this 
accusation was untrue, and that he 
was not solicited either by the Pope 
or emperor to write, nor anything at 
any time promised to him in their 
name for any such doings. How- 
beit, he saith he was on the other 
side promised no small reward, in the 
year of our Lord 1531, if he would 
either himself write against the mar 
riage, or procure some such censures 
and judgments from some universities 
of Germany as had proceeded from 
the universities of France and Italy. 
Yea, the very Lutherans were so 

licited and earnestly moved by the 
bishop of Hereford not without fair 
liberal promises, as was to be thought 
to give their j udgment for the set 
ting forth of the divorce, whereto 
they could by no means be in 

Professor of canon and civil 
law in the university of Louvain, 
of which he became rector in 1521, 
and in 1540 president of the Privy 
Council of Charles V. He published 
at Louvain, in 1 5 34, " Consilium super 
Viribus Matrimonii inter Henricum 
VIII. et Catharinam Austriacam." 
Paquot, i. 363. 

7 Eguinard Baron, born at Leon in 
Brittany, and professor of law in 
the university of Bourges. He died 
Aug. 22, 1550, aged fifty-five. 

8 Francis Duarene, of St. Brieu in 
Brittany, one of the most learned 
lawyers of his day. He was pro 
fessor of law at Bourges, where he 
died in 1559, being then about fifty. 

9 Francis de Connan, a most learn 
ed jurist, master of requests to the 
king of France. He died in the forty - 
third year of his age, A.D. 1551. 

10 Thomas de Vio, Cardinal bishop 
of Gaeta, his native place, a Do 
minican. He wrote a letter to Henry 
VIII., dated Rome, Jan. 21, 1534 ; 
and before this a report on the plead 
ings of the advocates on both sides, 
presented to Clement VII., dated 
Rome, May 13, 1530. They may be 
seen as Tractatus 13 and 14, in the 
third volume of the Opuscula of the 
Cardinal. Lugduni, 1562. 

8 4 


[BOOK i. 

and in other countries many other men of very great 
learning defended the marriage. 

A letter also of Philip Melancthon was in many men s 
hands, in which he recommended the king to keep his 
wife, but to treat Anne Boleyn as a concubine. The 
king, too, and certain noblemen wrote to the Pope, beg- 
oino- him, as it was a matter of great moment that there 
should be a male heir to the kingdom, 1 to have the 
question speedily decided, so that the king might take 
another wife. 2 The answer of the Pontiff was that he 
would do his duty, but it was not in his power to pro 
mise the birth of a male child to any woman in the 
world. 3 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. ii. p. 85. "The crown of Eng 
land also, for defect of issue male, is 
intrusted to tlie female. This dis 
course was not very seemly for an 
Englishman, neither was it seemly 
for any Christian man to devise and 
practise ways for a prince whereby 
he might put away his lawful wife 
for lack of issue male, neither was it 
to be thought that God would for 
tunate and bless such an unlawful 
divorce with any happy issue male. 
And indeed so it fell out, for albeit 
the divorce at length proceeded, yet 
had the king by the lady Anne Bul- 
leine no issue male ; and though he 
had such issue afterwards by another 
wife, yet had the realm thereby small 
comfort or commodity." 

2 The letter is printed by Lord 
Herbert (p. 331), who assigns to it 
the date of July 30, 1530. The 

writers threaten to find a remedy 
elsewhere if the Pope refused : " Hoc 
autem si non vult . . . ut aliunde 
nobis remedia conquiramus." It was 
signed by Cardinal Wolsey, arch 
bishop Warham, the bishops of Chi- 
chester, Carlisle, Lincoln, and Me- 
nevia, the dukes of Norfolk and 
Suffolk, the marquises of Dorset and 
Exeter, the earls of Arundel, Ox 
ford, Northumberland, Westmore 
land, Shrewsbury, Essex, Derby, 
"Worcester, Kutland, Cumberland, 
Sussex, Huntingdon, and Kildare, 
twenty-five barons, twenty-two ab 
bots, eight knights of the shire, 
and doctors ; among whom was Dr. 
Stephen Gardiner. 

3 Lord Herbert, p. 335. The Pope s 
letter is dated Sept. 27, 1530. The 
words paraphrased in the text are : 
" Sed pro Deo non sumus ut liberos 
dare possimus." 




IN order to ensure success, the king judged it well to 
alarm the Pope. 1 Accordingly in the month of September 
[1530] he issued a proclamation 2 to the effect that none 
of his subjects, whether English or Irish, should without 
his leave present any petition to, or receive any letter 
from, the court of Rome. Then, when he heard that 
Cardinal Wolsey was living in great state in York, 
giving sumptuous feasts with all the pomp of his rank, 
and demanding the restoration of his precious mitre, 3 
which the king held, he, considering all this to be some 
thing that he ought not to suffer, ordered the man to be 
arrested by Henry earl of Northumberland, 4 and then 

1 Harpsfield, bk. ii. p. 130. " Then 
\vas there the next year following, in 
the month of September, a proclama 
tion that no person should purchase 
from Rome., or use, or put in execution 
anything in a year past purchased, 
or to be purchased afterward, to the 
let, hindrance, or impeachment of 
the king s noble and virtuous in 
tended purposes ; which proclama 
tion was thought to be principally 
devised to put the queen in some 
fear to take benefit of anything she 
had obtained, or should obtain, from 
Rome. It might also, all under one, 
serve against the Cardinal, in case 
he had or would procure any curse 
or other thing from the court 
of Rome against the king, to be 

restored to his former dignity, 
authority, and jurisdiction." 

2 The substance of the proclama 
tion is printed in Lord Herbert s His 
tory, p. 330, and dated Sept. 19, 1 530. 
But Mr. Pocock (Records, ii. 49) 
gives the whole proclamation, and 
there the date is Sept. 12, 1530. 

3 Polydori Vergilii, lib. xxvii. p. 
688. " Non dubitabat scribere ad 
Henricum ut sibi commendaret mi- 
tram et pallium, quibus alias solebat, 
rem divinam faciendo, uti." 

4 Henry Algernon Percy, whose 
engagement to marry Anne Boleyn 
was broken by the Cardinal himself 
at the king s desire. The earl died 
in 1537. See Cavendish, Life of 
Cardinal Wolsey, p. 128. 



[BOOK i. 

to be brought to London. 1 But the Cardinal died on 
the road, at Leicester, on the 28th of November [i53o], 2 
and reports were spread abroad that he had taken poison. 3 
This, however, is certain, that on being arrested for 
high treason he said, " Oh that I had been as guiltless 
of treason against His Divine Majesty ! Now, indeed, 
while intent only on the serving the king, I have 
offended God, and have not pleased the king." Wolsey, 
of a truth, received in this world the reward due to his 
servility and pride, in order, as we trust, to escape the 
penalties thereof in the world to come. 

But as Henry did not glorify God in the great gift 
with which He had endowed him, but became vain in his 
thoughts, 4 preferriDg Anne Boleyn to his everlasting 
salvation, and even to God Himself, God gave him up to 
the service of his passions, which he worshipped instead 
of God, in order that he who despised the everlasting 
reward might not be deprived, at least, of the reward of 
corruption. Accordingly God called to Himself William 
Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, 5 a good man, who 

1 The installation of the Cardinal 
was fixed for Monday next after the 
feast of All Saints, but the earl of 
Northumberland arrested him on a 
charge of high treason on the Friday 
before the feast. Cavendish, p. 343. 

2 ; Quarto Decembris e vita mi- 
gravit," corrected in the following 
editions thus: "4Calendas Decem 
bris." According to Cavendish and 
others, he died on the 29th, the vigil 
of St.JAndrew, and " had upon him " 
(Cavendish, p. 395), " next his body, 
a shirt of hair, besides his other shirt, 
which was of very fine Holland cloth; 
this shirt of hair was unknown to all 
his servants being continually attend 
ing upon him in his bedchamber, ex 
cept to his chaplain, which was his 
ghostly father." 

3 Cavendish (p. 368) tells how the 
apothecary of the Cardinal gave him, 
at his request, " a certain white con 

fection," from the effects of which he 
never recovered." Chapuys, writing 
to the emperor, Dec. 4, 1530 (Pocock, 
Records, ii. 87), says it was rumoured 
that the Cardinal " apprins quelque 
chose pour haster ses jours." 

4 Rom. i. 21. 

6 The archbishop died Aug. 23, 
1532. Harpsfield (Treatise of Mar 
riage, bk. ii. p. 96) says : " Many 
ways were attempted to draw him 
to the king s side, and at length he 
fell in the king s high and grievous 
displeasure, and it was thought he 
should be appeached of treason for 
concealing the matter of the nun 
Elizabeth Barton, for his enemies 
had spread abroad rumours that 
he was privy to her doings. And 
Cromwell, that after the fall of the 
Cardinal grew in high estimation 
and credit with the king, scornfully 
said that if the king would be ruled 


had earnestly pleaded the cause of the queen ; and 
thereupon Henry, not willing that a place of honour 
so high should be fruitless to himself, determined to 
bestow it upon no one that would not minister with all 
his might to his passions. There was no one in the 
whole kingdom comparable to Begin aid Pole, and to 
him therefore the king made the first offer of the archi- 
episcopal dignity, but on the condition of a distinct 
promise beforehand on his part to further the divorce 
with all his might. 1 Pole heard of this dishonourable 
condition, and refused to sit in the chair of pestilence. 

When this came to the ears of Thomas Boleyn, the 
reputed father of Anne, he went to the king and said to 
him : " I have had for some time in my family a certain 
priest, grave, learned, and modest, whose fidelity to 
your majesty has been abundantly shown in the business 
on which he was sent to the Pope. He had been then 
for some time my chaplain, and I know him to be so 
well affected to the divorce that I will answer for him, 
if your majesty will make him archbishop, he will do 
whatever may be asked, or even desired, from any 
subject." 2 

by him, because he was an arch 
bishop, he should be hanged on high, 
that he might with his heels bless 
all the world." 

Harpsfield (ut supra, bk. ii. p. 97) 
tells the following story of the arch 
bishop : " He charged upon his 
blessing the right worshipful Sir 
William Warham, knt., his nephew 
and godson, being then a young 
gentleman and waiting upon him in 
his chamber, that if ever after his 
death any should succeed in that 
see called Thomas, he should in no 
wise serve him, or seek his favour 
or acquaintance, for there shall, saith 
he, one of that name shortly enjoy 
this see, that shall as much by his 
vicious living as wicked heresies, 

dishonour, waste, and destroy the 
same, and the whole Church of Eng 
land, as ever the blessed bishop 
and martyr St. Thomas did before 
beautify, bless, adorn, and honour 
the same. This I heard not long 
since out of the mouth of the said Sir 
William, who yet liveth." Harps- 
field has told this in his " Historia 
Anglic. Eccles." also, p. 623. 

1 This and the foregoing sentence 
were omitted in the second and fol 
lowing editions. 

2 Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 123. 
" When the king understood by the 
earl the great towardness of Cranmer 
to advance so much his desired pur 
pose, little caring whether it were 
by right or wrong, and done by 



[BOOK i. 

The proposal pleased the king, more especially be 
cause Anne Boleyn made the same request. Cranmer 
is therefore nominated, on the condition that, being arch 
bishop, he will, though the Roman Pontiff should give 
sentence in favour of the marriage, give sentence against 
that sentence, and that Catherine must be put away. 1 

But as Henry had not yet withdrawn from the com 
munion of the Holy See, Cranmer must obtain from 
the Pope the confirmation of his dignity. He saw at 
once that every avenue to his consecration was closed 
against him if he did not declare upon oath, according 
to the canons, that he would never depart from the 
communion of the Roman chair ; but he saw also into the 
intentions of the king, who would reject that communion 
"utterly rather than not be married to Anne Boleyn. 
Under these circumstances the wily man would try by 
the most profound hypocrisy to serve two masters 
issuing contradictory commands. 

lawful authority or no, he thought 
him a very meet man to serve his 
turn, and began daily more and 
more to be advised by him, being 
desirous to advance him to some 
high dignity ecclesiastical, that he 
might the better work his purpose 
by him. And shortly after, Dr. 
AVarham being dead, he bestowed 
upon him the archbishopric of Can 
terbury ; . . . and thereupon accord 
ingly, being at a bear-baiting, and 
Cranmer also, called the said Cran 
mer unto him, and there told him 
that he gave him the archbishopric of 
Canterbury, which thing being heard 
abroad, was an heavy boding to good 
and wise men of some great and evil 
mishap hanging upon the Church 
and realm of England." 

1 Cranmer, in his examination at 
Oxford before the bishop of Glou 
cester, was thus . addressed by Dr. 
Martin (Jenkyns, Cranmer s Works, 
iv. 92; Foxe, viii. 55): "You de 

clare well, by the way, that the king 
took you to be a man of good con 
science, who could not find within 
all his realm any man that would 
set forth his strange attempts, but 
was enforced to send for you in post 
to come out of Germany. What 
may we conjecture hereby, but that 
there was a compact between you, 
being then queen Anne s chaplain 
and the king s. Give me the arch 
bishopric of Canterbury, and I will 
give you licence to live in adultery. 
To this Cranmer replied, You say 
not true. " Cardinal Pole (letter to 
Cranmer, Le Grand, i. 302) says that 
Cranmer was made archbishop for 
no other end but that of giving an 
appearance of right and justice to 
the divorce, and that but for the 
divorce Cranmer himself would 
never have imagined that he could 
be made archbishop, and certainly 
no one else thought him a tit man 
for such a place. 


8 9 

He was fond of the king from his heart, because he 
was very like himself, and the Pope he regarded only 
with fear ; l and so the impious man, to please the king, 
determined to commit perjury, deliberately of his own 
free-will, that he might the more grievously at a later 
time hurt the Pope, not suspecting anything of the kind. 
Accordingly he sends for a public notary and tells him 
that he is about to take the canonical and accustomed 
oath of obedience to the Eoman Pontiff, but before 
doing so it was his will and wish that the notary should 
place it on record in a public document that he took the 
oath on compulsion, and that nothing was further from 
his thoughts than to keep faith with the Eoman Pontiff 
to the damage of the king. 2 

When this declaration had been made and lest, per 
chance, the king might have some doubts about his 
breach of faith, in the presence of witnesses recorded and 
sealed he took the solemn oath of obedience to the Pope 
as his predecessors had done, and at the same time took 
possession of the archbishopric like a thief. 3 

1 He said so in a sermon preached 
in the cathedral of Canterbury, and 
admitted that he so said in a letter 
to Henry VIII. (Jenkyns, Cranmer s 
Remains, i. 170), "These many years 
I prayed unto God that I might see 
the power of Rome destroyed ; and 
that I thanked God that I had now 
seen it in this realm." Nevertheless 
he accepted the archbishopric from the 
Pope, and took the oath to maintain 
the authority and power of Rome. 

2 Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 126. " But 
before he took the said oath, early in 
the morning, he called to him certain 
of his friends,and among others Master 
Goodriche, that was afterwards bishop 
of Ely, and said to them, Sirs, bear 
me witness that, albeit I shall swear 
this day to be obedient to the See of 
Rome, yet I shall swear but with my 
outward lips, and not with my in 
ward heart and mind ; neither do I 

intend to keep promise with the Pope 
that is absent, but to blind and breare 
the eyes of the people here present. 7 
And this protestation he required 
might be doubtless to his perpetual 
shame enacted and registered." 

3 Oanmer s Bulls were obtained in 
Rome in the usual way ; his proctor 
taking the oaths in his name and in 
his behalf. But Cranmer in England, 
by his own account (Jenkyns, iv. p. 
1 1 6), said that the proctor " should do 
it super animam suam" and that he, 
Cranmer, would not be bound by the 
promises made in his name and con 
firmed upon oath. Of this reserva 
tion the Pope and his officers knew 
nothing. He accepted the Bulls thus 
fraudulently obtained, and on the 
day of his consecration made a pro 
test before a notary that he would 
take himself the same oaths, but 
without the intention of keeping 


[BOOK i. 

By these doings he made himself acceptable to the 
king, and it might have been said that the cover was 
really meet for the cup. 1 There were people who many 
years afterwards heard the king say that Cranmer, the 
archbishop of Canterbury, was one who never thwarted 
him in anything. 2 

During the arrangements about the archbishopric, 
Henry, like a mighty hunter, resolved to subject to his 
authority the first-born of the kingdom of heaven, that 
is, the servants of Christ, and the whole of the chief 
part of His lot. By an act of tyranny never heard of 
before, he had all the clergy 3 indicted for having 

them (ibid., p. 248) "Non est nee 
erit meae voluntatis aut intentionis 
. . . meobligare ad aliquod" against 
the king or his laws. And further, 
that he never meant to authorise his 
proctor to bind him, though his 
proctor by his authority had, so far 
as words have any meaning, most 
solemnly done so. Having made 
this protest, he went up to the altar, 
said Mass, and then said to those 
in the secret of his sin, when about 
to take the oath of obedience to the 
Pope, that he took it under the pro 
test he had already made. The con 
secrating bishops may, or may not, 
have known of this dishonesty, but 
there is nothing in the records of it 
to show that they were his accom 
plices. Even if they knew of it, 
there is no excuse for Cranmer, for 
he and they knew that there was no 
authority in England to dispense 
Cranmer from the oath, or to allow 
him to take it in a new sense of his 
own. The Bull of the Pope recited 
the oath to be taken by Cranmer, 
and in the same Bull it is distinctly 
said that if Cranmer did not take 
the oath, both he and the bishop who 
consecrated him without that oath, 
were both suspended and forbidden 
the administration of their sees re 
spectively, both in temporals and 
spirituals : " Volumus autem et auc- 
toritate praedicta statuimus et de- 

cernimus quod si, non recepto a te 
[Cranmero] per ipsum antistitem 
praedicto juramento, idem antistes 
munus ipsum tibi impendere et tu 
illud suscipere prsesumpseritis, dictus 
antistes a pontificalis officii exercitio, 
et tarn ipse quam tu ab administra 
tions tarn spiritualium quam tem- 
poralium ecclesiarum vestrarum sus- 
pensi sitis eo ipso." Cranmer, then, it 
seems, never was archbishop of Can 
terbury, and all his acts were null 
except against himself. 

1 Harpsfield, bk. iii.p. 126. " Such 
an archbishop, so nominated, and in 
such a place, so, and in such wise con 
secrated, was a meet instrument for 
the king to work by a meet cover 
for such a cup." The same saying 
is to be found also in Latimer s Ser 
mons, ed. Parker Society, p. 181, 
" Such a cup ! such a cover ! " 

2 Cranmer said as much of him 
self. In his letter to Cromwell 
(Burnet, vi. 128, ed. Pocock) he 
says, " Against whose highness 
[the king s] he [Gardiner] knoweth 
right well that I will maintain no 
cause, but give place, and lay both 
my cause and self at my prince s 

3 Gardiner, writing to the Protec 
tor from the Fleet, Oct. 14, 1547 
(Foxe, vi. 43) : " Now, whether the 
king may command against an act 
of Parliament, and what danger they 


acknowledged and maintained, contrary to tlie king s 
will, the power of the Legates of the Eoman Pontiff, a 
foreign power, as men then began to call it. 1 For this 
offence all their goods were forfeited and at the mercy 
of the king s exchequer. 2 The terror inspired by this 
most iniquitous charge crushed the clergy and bowed 
them down to the ground. They were to lose all their 
property, be deprived of their liberty, and put in prison 
for the rest of their days. Seeing no hope of relief any 
where, they gave up the battle as lost, and allowed 
themselves to be trodden under foot as salt that has 
lost its strength. 

Accordingly, assembled in their House of Convocation, 
almost all the clergy of all ranks with one voice petitioned 
the king offering him at the same time a hundred 
thousand pounds of his goodness to forgive them and 
spare them the rest of the penalty. They asked him to 
do so in virtue of that supreme power, not only over 
the lay people, but also over the clergy within his 

may fall in that break a law with 
the king s consent, I daresay no 
man alive at this day hath had more 
experience, what the judges and 
lawyers have said, than I. First, I 
had experience in mine old master 
the Cardinal, who obtained his le 
gacy by our late sovereign lord s 
request at Rome, and in his sight 
and knowledge occupied the same, 
with his two crosses and maces 
borne before him, many years. Yet, 
because it was against the laws of 
the realm, the judges concluded the 
offence of the praernunire, which 
conclusion I bear away and take it 
for a law of the realm, because the 
lawyers so said, but my reason di 
gested it not." 

1 Cranmer, when he was offered the 
archbishopric by the king, confessed 
that he must receive it from the 
Pope, " which," he said (Jenkyns, 
iv. 115)} "he neither would nor 

could do," because the archbishopric 
" appertained to his grace, and not 
to any other foreign authority, what 
soever it was. . . . That he would 
accept it and receive it of his ma 
jesty, and of none other stranger who 
had no authority within this realm, 
neither in any such gift nor in any 
other thing." 

2 Stow, p. 559. "The clergy of 
England, being judged by the king s 
learned counsel! to be in the prae- 
muriire, for maintaining the power 
Legatine of the Cardinal, were called 
by process into the King s Bench to 
answer, wherefore in their convoca 
tion they concluded a submission, 
wherein they called the king su 
preme head of the Church of Eng 
land, according to the law of God, 
and not otherwise, and were con 
tented to give the king ; 100,000 to 
pardon their offences touching the 


dominions, which they now for the first time recognised 
in him. It is said that the words used in that petition 
furnished the occasion for the king to style himself the 
supreme head of the Anglican Church. 1 

Then was heard everywhere, out of every man s mouth 
who was living a corrupt life, that the Pope had nothing 
to do with the kingdom of England, unless it pleased 
the king to allow him any authority in it ; for, said 
they, every soul must be subject to the royal power, not 
only in civil but also in spiritual things. All this, it is 
true, was invented, maintained, and scattered abroad for 
the purpose of keeping people from imagining that the 
king had got rid of his wife without lawful authority. 

After this nothing more was wanting for the marriage of 
the king with AnneBoleynbut a public sentence of divorce, 
and the king had no expectation that the Eoman Pontiff 
would ever pronounce it. But he knew for certain that 
Cranmer, his tool, would shortly pronounce it, and then, 
lest he should be regarded as having made a person of 
low condition his wife, on the ist day of September he 
created Anne Boleyn marchioness of Pembroke. 2 

The king, now impatient of further delay, though 
everything had not yet been duly prepared, determined 
to marry Anne Boleyn secretly on the i4th of the fol- 

1 The convocation of the province that Henry, disliking the qualifica- 

of Canterbury, March 22, 1531, tion "so far as the law of Christ 

adopted this formula in addressing allows it r " sent Cromwell to the 

the king: " Ecclesiae et cleri Angli- convocation to tell the clergy that if 

cani, cujus singularem protectorem that clause were not withdrawn, the 

imicuni et supremum dominum, et penalties of the prsenranire would be 

quantum per Christi legem licet, inflicted. The clergy in their terror 

etiam supremum caput, ipsiusmajes- withdrew it, and accepted the king 

tatem recognoscimus." Wilkins, instead of the Pope. 

ConciL, iii. p. 742. According to 2 Stow, 560. " The ist of Sept. 

Parker (De Anti quit. Brit. Eccles.,p. [1532] the lady Anne Boloigne was 

487), Cranmer and Cromwell were made marchioness of Pembroke at 

the men who suggested this iniquity Windsor, and then was given her 

to the king: " Hujus consilii Cran- "by the king one thousand pound 

merus et Cromwellus clam authores by year out of the bishopric of 

i uisse existimabantur." And he adds Durham." 



lowing November. 1 He must marry her, for in no other 
way could he accomplish his will ; and the marriage must 
be secret, because he and Catherine had not been sepa 
rated by any judicial decision. Accordingly the king 
sent for Eowland Lee, 2 then a priest, and whom after 
wards he made bishop of Lichfield, and bade him say 
Mass according to the Catholic and Eoman rite. To 
him the king declared that at last sentence had been 
given in his favour in Rome, and that it was lawful for 
him to take another wife. Lee, considering that it was 
not usual for kings to tell a lie, was at first silent, but 
immediately afterwards his conscience smote him, and 
he said to the king, " Your majesty, I hope, has the 
Pontifical Brief." The king made a sign to that effect, 
and the priest turned to the altar. Again the priest, 
being in doubt, and afraid that he might be doing some 
thing that was wrong, said to the king, " The sacred 
canons require, and it is of the utmost concern to us, 
that the Papal letters be read and published." There 
upon the king asserted that he really had the Papal 
Brief, but that it was in a very secret place, where he 
only could find it ; it was not seemly that he should 
then go for it by himself, for it was not yet daylight. 
Eowland Lee made no further resistance, and having 

1 Hall, 794. " The king after his in schism, and on taking possession of 
return married privily the lady Anne the bishopric, he took also the oath of 
Bulleyn on St. Erkonwalds Day supremacy, and accepted the spiritual 
[Nov. 14], which marriage was kept jurisdiction from the king. These 
so secret that very few persons knew are the terms of his oath (Burnet, vi. 
it till she was great with child at 291, ed. Pocock) : "I acknowledge 
Easter after." and recognise your majesty immedi- 

2 A native of Morpeth, and a Cam- ately under Almighty God to be the 
bridge doctor. He was consecrated chief and supreme head of the Church 
bishop of Lichfield at Croydon by of England, and claim to have the 
Thomas Cranmer, April 19, 1534, bishopric of Chester wholly and only 
assisted by Longland, bishop of Lin- of your gift, and to have and to hold 
coin, and Thomas Chetham, bishop the profits temporal and spiritual of 
of Sidon. the same, only of your majesty, and 

No Bulls had been either asked for of your heirs, kings of this realm, and 
or obtained from the Pope, neverthe- of none other. ... So help me God, 
less Rowland Lee was consecrated, but all saints, and the holy evangelist." 



[BOOK i. 

said Mass, gave to Henry a second wife, the first being 
not only still alive, but not even divorced from bim by 
any decision pronounced in any ecclesiastical court, or 
anything of the kind whatsoever. 1 

marrying your grace without any 
banns-asking, and in a place unhal 
lowed, and no divorce as yet pro- 
inulged of the first matrimony. The 
king, looking upon him very amiably, 
Why, Mr. Kowland, quoth he, 
think you me a man of so small 
faith and credit, you, I say, that do 
well know my life passed, and even 
now have heard my confession ; or 
think you me a man of so small and 
slender foresight and consideration 
of my affairs, that unless all things 
were safe and sure I would enter 
prise this matter ? I have truly a 
licence, but it is reposed in another 
sure place, whereto no man resorteth 
but myself, which, if it were seen, 
should discharge us all. But if I 
should, now that it waxeth towards 
day, fetch it and be seen so early 
abroad, there would rise a rumour 
and talk thereof other than were 
convenient. So forth, in God s name, 
and do that which appertaineth to 
you. I will take upon me all other 
danger. Whereupon he went to 
Mass and celebrated also all cere 
monies belonging to marriage." Le 
Grand (ii. no) gives an extract from 
an account of the divorce presented 
to king Philip and queen Mary, 
which agrees with this extract from 
Harpsfield, but it does not say when 
the marriage took place. 

1 Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 24. " The 
which marriage was secretly made 
at Whitehall, very early before day, 
none being present but Mr. Norris 
and Mr. Heneage of the privy 
chamber, and the lady Barkely, with 
Mr. Kowland the king s chaplain, 
that was afterwards made bishop of 
Coventry and Lichfield, to whom 
the king told that now he had gotten 
of the Pope a licence to marry 
another wife, but yet, to avoid busi 
ness and tumult, the thing must be 
done, quoth the king, very secretly, 
and thereupon a time and place was 
appointed to the said Mr. Howland 
to solemnise the said marriage. At 
which time Mr. Kowland having 
come accordingly, and seeing all 
things ready for celebrating of Mass 
and to solemnise the marriage, being 
in a great dump, and staggering, came 
to the king and said, Sire, I trust 
you have the Pope s licence, both that 
you may marry and that I may join 
you together in marriage. * What 
else? quoth the king. Upon this 
he turned to the altar and revested 
himself, but yet not so satisfied, and 
troubled in mind, he cometh eftsoon 
to the king and saith, This matter 
toucheth us all very nigh, and there 
fore it is expedient that the licence 
be read before us all, or else we 
run all, and I more deep than any 
other, into excommunication, in 

( 95 ) 



HENRY VIII. pleaded an impediment to his marriage 
with Catherine which he knew had no existence, having 
at the same time knowledge that this very impediment 
subsisted against the marriage with Anne Boleyn ; for it 
is plain that, under the circumstances, there were only 
two possible impediments to the marriage of Henry and 
Catherine. One of them might have been that of 
affinity, if the marriage of Arthur, the brother of Henry, 
with Catherine had been perfected ; but the king knew 
that it had not, and said so to the emperor Charles V. 1 
Catherine herself always maintained that it had not, and 
that with the solemnity of an oath. 2 Moreover, the 
health of prince Arthur was so frail at the time, and 
there was therefore no ground for insisting on the 
impediment of affinity. 

Still further, even if the impediment did once subsist, 
it had been removed by the power of the keys of the 
kingdom of heaven in due form of law, in view of a 

1 See note 2, p. 63. tradict the queen, and in the whole 

2 Cardinal Campeggio (Theiner, course of the trial there is no hint 
p. 574) says that the queen persisted given by the king, or his agents on 
in tins statement ; and, according to his behalf, that the queen told any- 
Cavendish (p. 215), she asserted the thing but the truth. Attempts were 
fact again in the court of the Le- made to prove the contrary, but her 
gates, saying publicly there to the statement was never contradicted on 
king, " Whether it be true or not, any other ground than inferences 
I put it to your conscience." The drawn from the statements made by 
king, thus challenged, did not con- the king s witnesses. 


greater good the preservation of the public peace. 
Henry, it is true, maintained that the Pope could not 
dispense in the matter of that impediment ; but he was 
in the wrong, for if, under the law of Moses, which was 
the ministration of death and damnation, and which 
was made void, 1 there was a power not only of dispens 
ing with, but also of commanding, the marriage of a 
widow with the brother of the husband dying without 
issue, how much more certain is it that such a power, 
strong and stable, belongs to the keys of the Church of 
Christ, to the ministration of the spirit and of justice, 
and which have not been made void by any other testa 
ment, but remain to the end of time, and that a Chris 
tian, for the common good of the Church, may by that 
power be allowed to marry the widow of his brother 
deceased ? There was no impediment of affinity of any 
kind to hinder the marriage of Henry and Catherine ; 
and granting even that it did once subsist, the keys of 
Peter had taken it duly away. 

As for the impediment of public decency, which is 
the only one that remains to be considered, it is ad 
mitted by all that it rests on ecclesiastical, not on any 
divine or natural law. Neither the lawyers of the king 
nor the king himself ever denied the sufficiency of the 
power of the keys for its removal. Then as there was 
no affinity, and as the impediment of public decency 
was taken away by the Brief of Pope Julius II., there 
remained no hindrance to the marriage or to perseve 
rance in it. If any one were to say, by way of objec 
tion, that a man is forbidden by the law of God to 
marry the widow of his brother, the answer is ready, 
that the very same law of God makes an express excep 
tion : when the brother shall have died without issue, 2 
as prince Arthur had done. But we must not forget 

1 2 Cor. iii. 9-11. 2 Deut. xxv. 5. 


that the words of the divine law in the very same place 
are preceded and followed by certain considerations 
which utterly destroy the cause of the king. We read 
thus : " No man shall approach to her that is next of 
his blood, 1 to reveal her turpitude." And a little fur 
ther on: "The turpitude of thy brother s wife thou 
shalt not reveal, because it is the turpitude of thy 
brother." 2 The marriage of a brother s widow, there 
fore, is forbidden for no other reason than this : She had 
become of kin to the brother, because she had been the 
wife of the brother who is dead. Man and wife are one 
flesh, and therefore the widow of my brother is as near in 
blood to me as my brother is, who is my next in blood ; 
in the first degree of relationship. 

Therefore, then, if we were to grant that God spoke 
in that place not only of an unlawful approach, but also 
of marriage which many think is not the case and 
that by "brother s wife" is meant not only the wife 
of a brother still living as some of the holy Fathers 
maintain but also the wife of a brother deceased ; and 
still further, even, if we grant that the law in question 
was not ceremonial, but the expression of certain con 
clusions drawn from the law of nature, nevertheless, as 
the principle on which the law rests has been expressed 
more than once, and as that principle is nearness of 
blood, the result of consanguinity or of marriage con 
summated, which begets affinity, there was no tie of 
consanguinity or affinity to bind Henry and Catherine, 
seeing that the marriage of his brother was never con 
summated ; and so we come to the conclusion that the 
marriage of Henry and Catherine was not forbidden by 
the divine law. 

But, on the other hand, it is most certain that the 
impediment of affinity stood in the way of the king s 

1 Lev. xviii. 6. 2 Lev. xviii. 16. 



marriage with Anne Boleyn, and that the king knew it, 
seeing that in a letter to Clement VII. he confessed that 
he had committed adultery with Mary Boleyn, the sister 
of Anne, and was therefore of kin to the whole Boleyn 
family, according to the words of St. Paul, 1 " He who is 
joined to a harlot is made one body." Now, as Mary 
Boleyn was related to Anne in the first degree of con 
sanguinity, being her sister, born of one and the same 
mother, so Henry, because of his relations with Mary, 
stood in the first degree of consanguinity to all the 
brothers and sisters of Mary, and therefore to Anne 
Boleyn. It is come, then, to this : he who disturbed the 
world to obtain a divorce from Catherine on the ground 
of affinity, when there was none in truth, is not afraid to 
marry his kinswoman. He who said that the authority 
of the Pope could not justify him in keeping Catherine 
as his wife, now, not only without respect to that autho 
rity, but even in the very teeth of it, makes Anne Boleyn 
his wife, who was his near kinswoman. The king kicked 
against the goad in vain. God laid bare his hypocrisy, 
and revealed to the whole world the falsehood of his heart. 
That is not all. Henry had sinned with the mother 
of Anne Boleyn, 2 and there was, therefore, that relationship 
between them which subsists between parent and child. 
But it is never lawful for a father to marry his own 
daughter, for marriage is never allowed between descend 
ants and ascendants in the straight line. 3 Besides, the 

1 j c or> v i. 1 6. it, no man wotteth what they be, 

2 Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 28, Eyston for they be secret in my own con- 
MS. " Yea, I have credibly heard re- science : some other, peradventure, 
ported that the king knew the mother than those that other men would 
of the said Anne Bulleyne, which is ween, and such as I never disclosed 
a fourth impediment, and worse than unto any man yet, ne, nor never 
the precedent. Of the which im- intend to do while I live." 
pediments Sir Thomas Moore was s Scotus, 4 Sent. dist. 40, qu. unic. 
not by likelihood ignorant, and seem- "Non intelligitur tantum de patre 
eth to touch them, or suchlike, in proximo, sed de quocunque in linea 
these words which he wrote to Dr. recta, ita quod si Adam hodie viveret 
Wilson : Finally, as touching the non posset ducere aliquam uxorem." 
oath, the causes for which I refused 


state of marriage is one of almost equality. Eve was 
taken out of the side of Adam ; and children are bound 
to honour their parents, and to acknowledge themselves 
to be so much their inferiors that they can never be on an 
equality with them. That being so, it was therefore a 
much more difficult matter to dispense with the marriage 
of Henry and Anne Boleyn, seeing that he had sinned 
with her mother. Besides, the affinity thus contracted 
touches the essence of marriage too nearly to be decently 
disposed of by a dispensation, especially if the sin be 
known to many. 

Henry, therefore, who, against the law of nature in 
a certain sense, dared to marry the daughter of the 
mother he had defiled, was simply shameless when he 
pretended that he durst not keep his wife Catherine 
because he feared to sin against God; shameless also 
when he feigned to believe that it was not in the power 
of the Pope to sanction his marriage with Catherine. 

Still further. It is clear from what we have already 
said that Henry was told in no doubtful way that Anne 
Boleyn was his own child, and yet he married her, he 
who was afraid to keep his wife because she was the 
widow of his brother, though there were not, and though 
there could not be, any issue of that marriage. This 
was rashness not to be believed, hypocrisy unheard of, 
and lewdness not to be borne ; but it was the hypocrisy 
and the rashness and lewdness of one man. Nor is it to 
be much wondered at that a man should fall into sin, or 
that he should be contemptuous when he comes into the 
depths of it; 1 but this is marvellous and astonishing, 
that multitudes of men should endure patiently, not 
their own lewdness, but that of another not only endure 
it patiently, but respect it, praise and honour it, and 

1 Prov. xviii. 3. 


honour it so far as to build upon it their belief, their 
hope and salvation. 

Now, all English Protestants Lutherans, Zuinglians, 
Calvinists, Puritans, and Libertines honour the inces 
tuous marriage of Henry and Anne Boleyn as the well- 
spring of their gospel, the mother of their Church, and 
the source of their belief. Three years have hardly 
passed by since an English Calvinist in London presented 
to queen Elizabeth Matthew Parker, the pretended 
archbishop of Canterbury, standing by two books, but 
without his name, printed by John Day, in the latter of 
which, speaking of the marriage of Henry and Anne 
Boleyn, he says, " Oh, truly blessed and providential 
wedlock! birth and child divine, by which the country 
was rescued and delivered out of slavery and darkness 
worse than those of Egypt, and brought back to the 
Srue worship of Christ." 

Henceforth let no one be surprised at the ancient 
Cainites, people who worshipped Cain the murderer as 
the son of a mighty power; or at the Ophites, who, 
according to Tertullian, 2 reverenced, as the source of the 
knowledge of good and evil, the serpent, by which 
Adam and Eve were deceived in Paradise. For why 
should we not believe that such people once lived, when 
we see so many millions of heretics now treat with 
respect the marriage of father and child ? These assign 
their deliverance from slavery worse than that of Egypt 

1 " De visibili Bom. anarchia piis nuptiis edita est ad diuturnum 

contra Nich. Sanderi Monarchiam Anglican! regui imperium atque 

TrpoXeyfyevov, libri duo, Georgio patrocinium, seternumque Papalis 

Acwortho legum doctore." Londini Qpminationis excidium, Deo sacrata 

apudJohannemDayum, I573,p. 134. virgo domina Elizabetlia, septimo 

Matthew Parker himself was not idus Septembris." 
behindhand with Dr. Acworth, for De Prseser. Hseret., sec. 47. 

in his Life of Cranmer (De Anti- "Ophitso, . . . serpentemmagnificant 

quitate Britannicae Eccles.,p. 492, ed. . . . ipse enim, inquiunt, scientisa 

Drake) are these words : " Ex his nobis boni et mail originem dedit." 


to this marriage, and boast that it has brought back 
the true worship of Christ. 

Certainly it is true that this marriage has opened a 
door to every heresy and to every sin. Oh, the infinite 
goodness of God! He would not suffer these heresies of 
yours to come forth in any other way than through this 
incestuous marriage, thereby showing them to be the 
fruits of darkness, and that they could not be had but 
by deeds of darkness. The child must sin with the 
father, the sister with the brother for Anne Boleyn 
sinned with her brother, as we shall soon see in order 
to give birth to that evil thing which banished out of 
the land, and declared unworthy of life and the light of 
day, the Carthusian fathers and others, who, following 
the counsel of Christ, had made themselves eunuchs in 
order to gain the kingdom of heaven. 1 This was not 
all : it saw that the Church which, according to the words 
of our Lord, teaches and baptizes those who believe 
among all nations, is not the Church of Christ; that the 
Church of Christ is something else, lurking in secret 
places, in the caves of wild beasts, shunning the light, 
barren, unknown, without priesthood and without 
sacrifice; that it is not under the one shepherd who 
gathers together the sheep, dispersed throughout the 
world, into the one fold of Christ ; that it has not the 
promises of God made to the city built on the mount 
which cannot be hidden made to the children of light, 
not to those of the night to the sheep of Peter, to the 
fish within his net, not to those who stray from the fold, 
or those by whom the net is broken. 

Let us return to the subject of this book. The Koman 
Pontiff, after the most rigid examination of the question 
between Henry and Catherine, declared them bound 

l St. Matt. xix. 12. 


together in the bonds of lawful wedlock beyond the 
power of man to sunder. The sentence was as follows : 

" Clement Pope VII. Whereas the validity of the 
marriage contracted by Our most dearly beloved chil 
dren in Christ, Catherine and Henry VIII., king and 
queen of England, has been disputed, and the cause 
brought before Us, and by Us, in a consistory of the 
most reverend Cardinals, committed to Our beloved son, 
Paul Capisucchi, auditor of causes in the Sacred Apos 
tolic Palace, and dean ; and whereas the aforesaid Henry, 
while the cause was still pending, hath put away the said 
Catherine, and de facto married one Anne, contrary to 
Our commandments, and in contempt of Our prohibitions 
contained in Our letter in forma Brevis, 1 and sent forth 
after counsel had with Our brethren the Cardinals of the 
Holy Eoman Church, thereby temerariously disturbing 
the due course of law ; 

" We, therefore, in the fulness of that power given Us, 
unworthy as We are, in the person of the blessed Peter, 
by Christ the King of kings, sitting on the throne of 
justice, and looking unto God alone, do, by this Our 
sentence, which We pronounce, by Our duty constrained, 
and with the advice of Our venerable brethren, the 
Cardinals of the Holy Eoman Church, in consistory 
assembled, declare that the casting out of the said 
Catherine the queen, and the withholding of her wifely 
rights and royal dignity, whereof she stood possessed 
when the suit was begun, and also the marriage con 
tracted by the aforesaid Henry and Anne all manifest 
and notorious deeds to be what they are and were, 
null and unjust and contrary to law, to have been and 
to be tainted with the defects of nullity, injustice, 
and contempt of law ; and We further declare by the 
same sentence that the children, born or to be born of that 

1 See the Brief in Le Grand, iii. 444, and also in Tierney s Dod, i. 366. 


marriage, are and have always been bastards : We also 
declare that the said Catherine the queen is to be restored 
to, and reinstated in, her former rank, and quasi-pos- 
session of her wifely rights and royal dignity, and that 
the king aforesaid must put away and remove the 
aforesaid Anne from his house and quasi-possession of 
wifely and royal rights, and by this sentence in writing 
We restore and reinstate, put away and remove, the 
aforesaid persons respectively. 

" Moreover, by this same sentence, after due deliber 
ation had, in virtue of Our office, We pronounce the 
aforesaid Henry to have fallen, to his own damnation, 
under the censure of the greater excommunication, and 
to have brought upon himself the other censures and 
penalties in the aforesaid Brief expressed, because of 
his disobedience thereto, and contempt thereof, and We 
command all the faithful to avoid him. 

" Nevertheless, as a father tender of heart, We wish to 
deal gently and mercifully with the said Henry, and so 
We suspend the effects of this sentence from this day to 
the end of September next, that he may the more easily 
obey Our sentence and decrees aforementioned. 

"And if within that time he shall not have submitted 
himself, and shall not have reinstated the said Catherine 
in her former rank, in which she was when the lawsuit 
began, and if he shall not have put the aforesaid Anne 
from his house and her quasi-possession of the rights 
of wife and queen, and if he shall not have effectually 
purged his contempt, then We will and decree that this 
present sentence shall take effect now as then. So We 

( I0 4 ) 





HENRY regarded the sentence as a wrong done to him 
self, and then, to be avenged of the Pope for his vexa 
tion, took measures for the abolition by Parliament of 
the oath which the English clergy took to the Pope ; l 
and, as was done of old by Julian the Apostate, creat 
ing himself Pope, ordered a new oath to be taken, in the 
terms of which the clergy and people acknowledged him 
as the supreme head on earth, next to Christ, of the 
English and the Irish Church. 2 Thus Henry cut off and 

1 Hall, p. 787, says that the king 
sent for the Speaker of the Commons 
on the i ith May, in the twenty- fourth 
year of his reign, which was A.D. 1 532, 
and gave him a copy of the oath taken 
by the prelates, saying of them that 
they were but "half our subjects, 
yea, and scarce our subjects." Now 
the king knew well that the bishops, 
for more than two hundred years, 
had been renouncing all clauses in 
their Bulls which they were pleased 
to call "prejudicial or hurtful" to 
the king " their sovereign lord," and 
professing to accept the temporalities 
of their churches from the king. 
Lord Herbert (p. 363) says, "Where 
upon these two oaths by the king s 
command being read and con 
sidered, the Parliament so handled 
the business, as it occasioned the final 
renouncing of the Pope s authority 
about two years after." 

In the twenty-sixth year of the king, 
A.D. 1 535, an oath was to be taken by 
all persons to this effect (26 Henry 
VIII. c. 2) : " In case any oath be 
made, or hath been made by you to 
any person or persons, that then ye 
to repute the same as vain and anni 

2 The oaths of the bishops at this 
time may be seen in Foxe, v. 70-73. 
Each bishop acknowledges the king 
to be the supreme head of the Church 
of England " immediately under 
Christ," and from " this day forward 
I shall swear, promise, give, or cause 
to be given to no foreign potentate, 
. . . nor yet to the bishop of Rome 
whom they call Pope, any oath or 
fealty, directly or indirectly ; . . . 
but at all times, and in every case and 
condition, I shall . . . maintain . . . 
the quarrel and cause of your royal 
majesty and your successors. ... I 


severed botli himself and his people from the fellowship 
and communion of the Eoman Church, in which ever 
since the days of Joseph of Arimathia all those kings 
and people had lived, who in these islands, each in his 
own generation, followed the Catholic faith of Christ ; 
and they were the Irish, the Angles, the Normans, the 
Danes, and, the most ancient of them all, the Welsh. 

We all know, king, that thriving and glorious 
Church which you have abandoned and left : the Church 
founded by the great apostles Peter and Paul, which 
has prospered and endured under two hundred and 
thirty successors of St. Peter, 1 which the bishops, the 
kings, and people of all Catholic nations have confessed 
and honoured, which shuns and condemns the impious 
teachings of all heresies and all heretics, which abounds 
in fathers and doctors that cannot be numbered, and 
which is made glorious by the works of God truly mar 
vellous and unceasing. But tell us, we adjure you by 
that supreme authority which you have assumed, whither 
did you go when you went out of the Roman Church ? 
For if you would remain a Christian, you cannot do so 
without being in some Church. It is indeed true that 
the apostle Paul went out from among the Jews, 
Dionysius from the Areopagus, Justin the Martyr from 
the philosophers, and Augustin from the Manichees, all 
from the errors of the nations ; but then every one of 
these, before he abandoned those with whom he had 
hitherto dwelt, saw first another society older than him 
self to which he could go. Paul went to Ananias, and 
to the others, the faithful of Damascus ; Dionysius to 

profess the Papacy of Rome not to realm . . . enacted and established 

be ordained of God by Holy Scrip- for the extirpation and suppression 

ture, . . . that the said bishop of of the Papacy, and of the authority 

Eome ... is not to be called Pope and jurisdiction of the said bishop 

or supreme bishop, . . . but only of Home." 

bishop of Rome. And I shall firmly l This was written in the Foil- 
observe . . . laws and acts of this tifical of Gregory XIII. 


Paul and his companions ; Justin to the Church of Christ 
in Palestine ; Augustin to Ambrose of Milan and the 
Catholic Church. 

But you, king, when you deserted the Eoman 
Church, to what other Church did you go ? Did you go 
to the Greek Church ? Certainly not, for you have not 
denied the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son. 
Did you go to the ^Ethiopia Church ? No, for you have 
not submitted to the rite of circumcision. Did you go 
to the Armenians ? No, for you have not denied original 
sin, nor, as they do, the salvation of all who died before 
the Passion of Christ. But at least, then, you went to 
Wicliffe, Luther, Zuinglius, or Calvin ? Well, if you 
found any in your kingdom holding the errors of these 
men, you persecuted them with fire and sword. Whither, 
then, did you go when you went out of the Eoman 
Church ? Whither, indeed ? It was to yourself. Well, 
then, you are Christ; for He alone has the authority 
necessary for the founding and gathering of the Christian 
Church together. He it was who said to Peter, " Thou 
art Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church." : 
What, I ask you, does He mean by "mine," if He does 
not mean the Christian Church ? Christ, therefore, sends 
us to Peter, that is to say, to His Vicar ; and you ? you 
take us away from Peter, and call us to yourself. Then 
you are Antichrist, as it is written, " Beware that no 
man seduce you, for many will come in my name, say 
ing, I am Christ, and will seduce many." : To come in 
the name of Christ, or to say, " I am Christ," is nothing 
else but a man s making himself, without signs of an 
apostolate, without lawful and orderly mission, the head 
of the Church, as if the care of the sheep of Christ had 
been originally and principally committed to him. Had 
the Church, then, died out of the world had the 
1 St. Matt. xvi. 1 8. 2 St. Matt. xxiv. 4, 5. 


prophecies and promises of Christ failed before Henry 
and his child, had in incest, begotten a new Church 
of Christ ? But if the Church of Christ has not failed, 
she must have been older than you. And if older than 
you, and yet not the Roman Church, you, when you 
left the Roman Church, should have gone to that which 
in your senseless decision is the truer ; you should 
have made yourself a member of it by some sacrament, 
or at least by the mere laying on of hands, that we by 
that may know the society to which you belong, and 
the faith you profess. But now you have made yourself 
to your subjects the supreme head of the Church, you 
who were not even the lowest member of her. 

Matters being thus arranged, the time had come when 
archbishop Cranmer, released, by the authority of a lay 
assembly, 1 from the obligations of the oath he had taken 
to the Roman Pontiff, felt himself at liberty, even 
against the orders of the Roman Pontiff, to separate 
Henry arid Catherine by a sentence of divorce. Accord 
ingly, with Henry s leave, 2 he took with him certain 
bishops, proctors, advocates, and notaries to the town of 
Dunstable, not far from the royal residence of Amp thill, 
where the queen was living at the time. He summoned 
the queen more than once to appear in his court, 3 and 
when he had waited, but in vain, for a fortnight, he 

1 24 Henry VIII. c. 12, the statute any other earthly creature, yet be- 
by which appeals to the Pope were cause ye be under us, by God s calling 
forbidden. the most principal minister of our 

2 Cranmer asked leave of the king spiritual jurisdiction, within this our 
to put an end to the suit between realm, . . . will not therefore re- 
the king and his wife, though the fuse our pre-eminence and autho- 
cause was then in due course of law, rity to us and our successors in this 
beyond all mere episcopal jurisdic- behalf nevertheless saved your 
tion, pending in the court of the Pope, humble request. . . . Wherefore 
The king gave him leave in these we inclining to your humble petition, 
terms (Collier, Eccles. Hist., ii. Ee- .... do license you to proceed in 
cords, No. 24) : " Albeit we being the said cause." 

your king and sovereign, do recognise 3 Herbert, p. 375. "With him 
no superior in earth, but only God, came the bishop of London [Stoke- 
and not being subject to the laws of sley], Winchester, being Stephen Gar- 



[BOOK i. 

made his preparations for pronouncing the sentence of 
divorce. 1 Before this, he had warned the king, as one 
who in some measure shrunk from the divorce that was 
done by agreement between them no longer to retain his 
brother s wife contrary to the laws of the gospel ; and if 
he did not obey, he said he must, however unwilling, 
because of the office he held in the Church of God, pro 
ceed to ecclesiastical censures against the king. 2 

diner, Bath [Clerk], Lincoln [Long- 
land], and many great clerks." The 
bishop of Bath and Wells had been 
one of the queen s counsel, and Long- 
land now completed his first sin. An . 
account of this proceeding is to be 
found in Pocock, Kecorcls, ii. p. 473. 

1 Cranmer, in his letter to arch 
deacon Hawkins (Jenkyns, Cran 
mer, vol. i. p. 27), thus speaks of his 
proceedings : " It was thought con 
venient by the king and his learned 
counsel that I should repair unto 
Dunstable, which is within four miles 
unto Ampthill, where the said lady 
Katherine keepeth her house, and 
there to call her before me to hear 
the final sentence in the said matter. 
Notwithstanding, she would not at 
all obey thereunto, for when she was 
by Dr. Lee cited to appear by a day 
she utterly refused the same, saying 
that inasmuch as her cause was be 
fore the Pope, she would have none 
other judge ; and therefore would not 
take me for her judge. . . . We 
examined certain witnesses which 
testified that she was lawfully cited 
and called to appear, whom from 
fault of appearance was declared con- 
tumax : proceeding in the said cause 
against her in posnam contumacies, 
as the process of the law thereunto 
belongeth, which continued fifteen 
days after our coming thither. And 
the morrow after Ascension Day I 
gave final sentence therein, how that 
it was indispensable for the Pope to 
license any such marriages." 

But the proceedings were clandes 
tine. Cranmer confesses in his letter 

to Cromwell, Dunstable, May 17, that 
he wished his doings at Dunstable 
to remain secret, for fear the queen 
should hear of them, and counsel 
appear on her behalf. " If the queen 
appeared," says Cranmer, " I should 
be greatly stayed and let in the pro 
cess, and the king s grace s counsel 
here present shall be much uncertain 
what shall be then further done there 
in." The letter is in Jenkyns, Ee- 
mains of Cranmer, i. p. 26. Thus 
the archbishop, who had perjured 
himself to obtain the archbishopric, 
made a mockery of justice, consult 
ing with the lawyers of the plaintiff, 
and preparing to give the sentence 
which the king desired, but which 
he could not pronounce according to 
any jurisprudence ever heard of, the 
cause being at the time in the court of 
appeal with the consent of the plain tiff. 
2 Jenkyns, Cranmer, i. p. 22. "I 
would be right loth, and also it shall 
not become me, forasmuch as your 
grace is my prince and sovereign, to 
enterprise any part of my office, in 
the said weighty cause, touching 
your highness, without your grace s 
"favour and licence obtained in that 
behalf." Cardinal Pole, in his 
letter to Cranmer (Le Grand, i. 298), 
thus addresses him : " Was it not 
a mockery of the king to exhort him 
by pompous discourses to put away 
his wife, when everybody knew that 
he was doing all he could for that 
end ? And to make your mockery 
the more complete, you threatened 
him with the censures of the Church, 
as if vou were afraid he would not 


The king s flatterers l cried out : " Oh the marvellous 
freedom of speech in a subject ! Now indeed we see how 
great is the difference between the religion of Papistry and 
the true gospel of God. This bishop, if he were not- 
sent of God, would not have dared thus to remind the 
king of his duty. Oh blessed day, which first brought 
us this heavenly light ! " 

Moreover, Thomas Cranmer, from the household of Anne 
Boleyn, was chosen as judge by the plaintiff in the suit 
on the condition of pronouncing the sentence of divorce. 
He never heard a word from the defendant, and boldly 
declared that the king was bound by the divine law to 
put Catherine away, and that he was free to marry 
again. 2 But Henry himself, holding the judge and the 
sentence in his own hand, and knowing well what the 
end would be, had already married Anne Boleyn, 

listen to you, and at the same time 
everybody was well aware that on 
no considerations, human or divine, 
would he consent to retain his 

1 Pocock, Eecords, ii. 529. "Arti 
cles devised by the nolle consent of 
the kynges most honourable coun- 
seyle, &c. Art. 8: Our good bishop of 
Canterbury . . . apperceiving when 
he came to his dignity that his 
prince and sovereign lived in unlaw 
ful and unfitting matrimony, accord 
ing to his duty did admonish him, 
and therein also reproved him, ex 
horting him to leave it, or else he 
would do further his duty in it, so 
that at the last, according to God s 
laws, he did separate his prince from 
that unlawful matrimony. In which 
doing, we think that every true sub 
ject should much the better esteem 
him, because he would execute God s 
commandment and set this realm in 
the way of true heirs," 

2 Prevarication of Holy Church s 
Liberties, bk. i. ch. i. s. 24, Eyston 
MS. "Moreover, the proceedings 
made before archbishop Cranmer 

were done coram non judice, for that 
he was not indifferently chosen by 
the king and queen. . . . Beside, 
the judge was a man chosen out of 
the family of Anne Bullen s reputed 
father, to whom he was a chaplain : 
he was much affected to Anne, de 
sirous to advance her, yea, and 
obliged thereto, as recommended by 
her and Sir Thomas Bui Jen for a 
man fit to comply with the king in 
the matter of the divorce, to which end 
he was simoniacally preferred upon 
condition to sentence the divorce, 
and therein became capable of a 
premeditated perjury in swearing 
canonical obedience to the Apostolic 
See, and immediately prevaricat 
ing the same. . . . The Pope having 
admitted the queen s appeal, hath 
thereby closed the hands of Cranmer, 
or any other spiritual judge whatso 
ever, from any proceedings in the 
cause of the appeal, especially as the 
law stood at the time of the queen s 
first appeal, and therefore the said 
divorce was made coram non judice, 
viz., by Cranmer, that had no lawful 
authority for the same." 



[BOOK i. 

though he had put off the solemn celebration of the 
wedding till Easter Eve. Anne therefore was on that 
day, the day kept in honour of our Lord s burial, 1 the 
1 2th of April [1533], brought forth before the world as 
the king s wife, 2 and on the 2d of June next following 3 
was crowned, and on the 7th day of September, in the 
same year, in the fifth month after the marriage was 
publicly celebrated, gave birth to Elizabeth, Henry s 
child. It is clear, therefore, that there must have been 

a secret marriage. 

Elizabeth was baptized at Greenwich, and then the 
king 4 called upon every bishop, and upon every person in 
orders, upon all the nobles, and upon every Englishman 
whatsoever of full age, to take an oath that Elizabeth 
was the next and the lawful heir to the kingdom of 
England. At the same time he robbed Mary, the 
daughter of Catherine, as being the issue of a marriage 
that was unlawful, of her right to the throne. That 
oath was tendered to John Fisher, the bishop of 
Eochester, and to Thomas More. 5 The latter seeing the 

1 Wriothesley, Chronicle of Eng- 
]and, p. 17, Camden Soc. " The I2th 
clay of April, Anno Domini 1533, 
beinge Easter Eeaven, Anne Bulleine, 
marques of Pembroke, was pro- 
clay med queene at Greenwych, and 
off red that daie in the kinges chap- 
pell as queene of England. And 
the Wednesdaie before the good 
queene Katherin was deposed at 
Hanthille by the duke of Norfolke." 

2 Hall, 795. " The king perceiv 
ing his new wife queen Anne to be 
great with child, caused all officers 
necessary to be appointed to her, 
and so on Easter Eve she went to 
her closet openly as queen, and then 
the king appointed the day of coro 
nation to be kept on Whitsunday 
next following." 

3 It seems to be universally ad 
mitted that Anne Boleyn was 

crowned on Whitsunday 1533, i.e., 
June ist, and the author conse 
quently must have erred in saying 
that she was crowned June 2d. 

4 The Parliament that met at 
Westminster Jjfti. 15, 25 Henry 
VIII., and which sat till March 30, 
1534, made a law, c. 22, called the 
Act concerning the Succession, to the 
effect that " all the nobles of your 
realm spiritual and temporal, as all 
other your subjects, now living and 
being, or hereafter that shall be at 
their full ages, . . . shall make a cor 
poral oath" to hold as invalid the 
marriage of Henry and Catherine, 
and to hold as valid the marriage of 
Henry and Anne Boleyn, and that 
Elizabeth was born in lawful wed 
lock, and heir to the crown. 

5 On the 1 3th of April 1534, at 
Lambeth, by Cranmer, Sir Thomas 


king rushing headlong into all wickedness, had not long 
before resigned the chancellorship. 1 They refused to 
take the oath, and were thrown into prison. As Sir 
Thomas More was led into the Tower of London, the 
warder of the prison was standing at the gate, and as 
usual demanded the upper garments of the prisoner. 
Sir Thomas, who was always cheerful, took off his cap 
and handed it to him at once ; but the warder said, 
" I do not mean this, but the cloak which you have on." 
" Surely," said Sir Thomas, " the cap is the upper 
garment, for it covers the upper part of the body." 
Thus this saintly man, at the very doors of the prison, 
which to most men is full of terror, amused himself as 
if he were at a feast. He used to say that the world at 
large, into which man was driven when banished out of 
Paradise because of sin, was nothing else but a prison, 
out of which men are called every day to answer for 
themselves. His prison was smaller than the prisons of 
other great men, and he thanked God for it, for of those 
things which are not pleasant the least is preferable. 
His blessed soul cheered itself with thoughts of this 

At this time the name of the nun Anne Barton 2 was 

Audley, then lord chancellor, and priests whereof two were seculars, 
Thomas Cromwell, secretary of state, two Benedictines, and two Fran- 
Sir Thomas More was the only lay- ciscans were executed. All the Ob- 
man summoned that day. servant friars of Greenwich, Canter- 

1 He resigned May 16, 1532. bury, and Richmond, Newark and 

2 Prevarication of the Church s Newcastle, being houses of the 
Liberties, ch. iv. s. 3, Eyston MS. foundation of Henry VII., only 
" The nun Elizabeth Barton, famous because they wholly stood for the 
for virtue and the gift of prophesying, cause of queen Catherine, were all 
because she foretold, as afterwards of them driven and cast out of their 
it came to pass, that the lady Mary, monasteries; and the authority of the 
then debased under the lady Eliza- Pope, because he could not in justice 
beth, should reign in her own right be for the divorce of queen Catherine, 
before the same lady Elizabeth, was not only abolished, but the very 
was by Parliament attainted, and name and word Pope or Papa was 
with her Richard Masters, Edward persecuted, insomuch as by pro- 
Bocking, John Bearing, Hugh Rich, clamation he caused it to be blot- 
Richard Forisby, and Henry Gold, all ted out, defaced, or erased in all 


in all men s mouths. She said that Henry was no longer 
a king, because he reigned not of God j 1 that Mary, 
the daughter of Catherine, then regarded as one born 
out of lawful wedlock, would ascend the throne in her 
own right. For these sayings the nun was attainted, and 
by an act of Parliament 2 condemned and put to death, 
together with two Benedictines and two Franciscans, 3 all 
of whom believed her to have spoken, moved by the 
Spirit of God. 

Sir Thomas More, among others, had carefully tested 
the spirit of the nun, and was unable to discover in it 
any trace of that fanaticism which was maliciously laid 
to her charge at the time. 4 "What is certain is this, that 
she said that in due time things would come to pass 
which were at that time regarded as impossible; for 
Mary, who then was made to give way to Elizabeth, 
came afterwards to the throne before her, and in her 
own right. 

Out of all the clergy, none withstood the divorce with 
greater freedom than the Friars minor, commonly called 
the Observants. 5 They, indeed, both in public disputa- 

almanacs, calendars, yea, and in the same house, Richard Master, 

the books of all scholastic writers and parson of Aldington, and Henry 

doctors of the Holy Church, which Hold, priest, were drawn from the 

is the cause why in so many old Tower of London to Tiborne, and 

Latin and English books, printed there hanged and headed ; the nun s 

or manuscript, we may all this day head was set on London Bridge, and 

behold the said word Papa or Pope the other heads on the gates of the 

to be scraped or dashed out." city." _ 

1 Osee viii. 4. " Ipsi regnaver- 4 Sir Thomas in his letter to 
unt sed non ex me." Cromwell (Burnet, .485, ed. Pocock) 

2 25 Henry VIII. c. 12. says, u Howbeit, of a truth, I had a 

3 Stow, p. 570: "After Christmas great good opinion of her, and had 
the Parliament began wherein the her in great estimation, as you shall 
forenamed Elizabeth Barton and perceive by the letter I wrote unto 
other her complices were attainted her." 

of heresies." P. 571 : "The 2oth 5 Harpsfield, bk. ii. p. 142. 

April [1534], Elizabeth Barton, a "There was then among the Ob- 

iiun professed, Edward Booking and servant friars at Greenwich a man 

John Deering, two monks of Christ s of a good house and family, called 

Church in Canterbury, and Richard Peto," who, preaching before the 

Riaby and another of his fellows of king on the history of Achab, said, 


tions and in their sermons, most earnestly maintained 
that the marriage of Catherine was lawful ; and the two 
fathers, Elston and Peto, 1 made themselves more re 
markable herein than the rest. For this the king so 
hated all the friars of the Observance, that on the 1 1 th 
of August he drove them out of every monastery of their 
order ; 2 and speaking to Elston, threatened to throw him 

" Your preachers resemble the 400 
preachers of Achab, in whose mouths 
God had put a lying spirit. But I 
beseech your grace to take good 
heed lest, if you will needs follow 
Achab in his doings, you incur his 
unhappy end also, and that the dogs 
lick your blood as they did his, 
which God forbid. What moved 
this father to speak these words 
God knoweth, but that so it came to 
pass a very strange event did after 
wards show ; for at what time his 
dead corpse was carried from London 
to Windsor, there to be interred, it 
rested the first night at the monastery 
of Sion, which the king had sup 
pressed. At which time, were it for 
the joggings and shaking of the 
chariot, or for any other secret cause, 
the coffin of lead wherein his dead 
corpse was put, being riven and 
cloven, all the pavement of the 
church was with the fat and the 
corrupt putrefied blood dropped out 
of the said corpse foully imbrued. 
Early in the morning those that had 
the charge of the dressing, coffining, 
and embalming of the body, with 
the plumbers, repaired thither to 
reform the mistake, and lo ! suddenly 
was there found among their legs a 
dog lapping and licking up the king s 
blood, as it chanced to king Achab 
before specified. This chance one 
William Consett reported, saying he 
was there present, and with much 
ado drove away the said dog." 

1 Stow, p. 562. " The first that 
openly resisted or reprehended the 
king touching his marriage with 
Anne Boloigne was one Friar Peto, 
a simple man, yet very devout, of 
the Order of the Observants. . . . 

The king being thus reproved, en 
dured it patiently, and did no 
violence to Peto ; but the next 
Sunday, being the 8th of May, Dr. 
Curwin preached in the same place, 
who most sharply reprehended Peto 
and his preaching, and called him 
dog, slanderer, base beggarly friar, 
closeman, rebel, and traitor. . . . 
1 1 speak to thee, Peto, which makest 
thyself Micheas that thou mayest 
speak evil of kings, but now thou 
art not to be found. 7 . . . Whilst he 
thus spake, there was one Elston, a 
fellow friar to Peto, standing in the 
Roodloft, who with a bold voice said 
to Doctor Curwin, Good sir, you 
know that Father Peto, as he was 
commanded, is now gone to a pro 
vincial council holden at Canter 
bury, and not fled for fear of you, 
for to-morrow he will return again. 
In the meantime I am here as 
another Micheas. . . . Even unto 
thee, Curwin, I say, which art one 
of the four hundred prophets into 
whom the spirit of lying is entered, 
and seekest by adultery to establish 
succession, betraying the king unto 
endless perdition, more for thy own 
vainglory and hope of promotion 
than for discharge of thy dogged 
conscience and the king s salvation. " 
Stow (p. 560) says that Curwin 

S reached on the 28th May. Dr. 
urwin was made dean of Hereford 
in 1541, archbishop of Dublin in 
1555, and in 1 567 was transferred by 
Elizabeth to Oxford, being then an 
avowed Protestant. 

2 Lord Herbert s Life of Henry 

VIII., p. 407. "The nth of 

August this year, our king, as he 

was watchful over the voice and 



[BOOK i. 

into the bottom of the sea if he did not hold his tongue. 1 
The friar replied, "I never had any misgiving about 
going to God as quickly by water as by land." Ordered 
to leave England immediately, he retired into Flanders, 
where he remaioed till queen Mary came to the throne, 
when, having returned, he slept in peace in the monas 
tery of his order in Greenwich. 2 

In the month of November 3 Parliament assembled, 
and Henry, for the purpose of revenging himself still 
more upon the Pope, took away from him all jurisdic 
tion and power over the English and the Irish, and 
declared every one who should henceforth acknowledge 
the Pope s jurisdiction guilty of high treason. 4 He 

affection of his people, or for 
the finding out how they would 
take his design of putting down 
religious houses, began with the 
remove of some, and therefore sup 
pressed at Greenwich, Canterbury, 
Kichmond, and other places the Ob 
servant friars, noted to be the most 
clamorous against him." 

1 Stow assigns this threat to the 
earl of Essex, Henry Bourchier, who 
died A.D. 1 539. His title and estates 
were given to Cromwell. 

2 Harpsfield, bk. ii. p. 145. " After 
a day or two they were called before 
the council, and after many rebukes 
and threats, a nobleman told them 
that they deserved to be thrust into a 
sack and to be thrown and drowned in 
the Thames, whereat Friar Elstowe, 
smiling, said, Make those threats, 
saith he, to the courtiers ; for as for 
us, we make little account, knowing 
right well that the way lieth as open 
to heaven by water as by land. Of 
this sermon and answer myself have 
heard the said Father Elstowe report. 
In fine they were banished, neither 
they two only, but all the Observants 
also, because they were of the same 
judgment, and could not find in their 
hearts to soothe and flatter the king 
with his false prophets. But see the 

providence of God ; for as they were 
the first that at the commencement 
of the schism were banished and 
exiled, so the same, being practised 
by our gracious king and queen, 
they were the first of all other that 
were called home and restored, after 
twenty-four years, to their old and 
dear habitation." 

3 Stow, p. 571. "The 3d of No 
vember the Parliament sat at West 
minster, wherein the Pope with all 
his authority was clean banished 
this realm, and order taken that he 
should no more be called Pope, but 
bishop of Home, and the king to be 
taken and reputed as supreme head 
of the Church of England." 

4 The king in his proclamation, 
June 9, 1534 (Foxe, v. 69), made it 
known that " the bishops and clergy, 
... by word, oath, profession, and 
writing under their signs and seals, 
have confessed, ratified, corroborated, 
and confirmed" the king s title of 
supreme head, "utterly renouncing 
all other oaths and obedience to any 
other foreign potentates, and all 
foreign jurisdictions and powers, as 
well of the said bishop of Borne as 
of all others, whatsoever they be." 
In the course of the next year all 
the bishops were made to surrender 


made an onslaught on the word Pope, and gave orders 
that for the future the Eoman Pontiff should be called, 
not the Pope, but the bishop of Eome only. 1 He him 
self, the king alone, was to be considered supreme head 
of the Anglican Church, to whom above all others it 
belonged, by his full authority, to correct all errors, 
heresies, and abuses in the Church of England. 2 The 
first-fruits of all benefices were to be paid to him, 3 and 
also the tithes of all ecclesiastical dignities. 4 The king 
had the laws executed with such severity that a man 
might be condemned to death if he left unerased the 
name of the Pope in any book belonging to him. The 

their Bulls, that they might hence 
forth be bishops by the grace of the 

1 The king, according to the same 
proclamation (Foxe, v. 70), ordered 
the bishops " to cause all manner 
of prayers, orisons, rubrics, canons, 
mass-books, and all other books in 
the churches, wherein the said 
bishop of Kome is named, or his pre 
sumptuous and proud pomp and au 
thority preferred, eradicated and 
rased out, and his name and memory 
to be never more except to his con 
tumely and reproach remembered, 
but perpetually suppressed and ob 

2 26 Henry VIII. c. i. "That our 
said sovereign lord, his heirs and 
successors, kings of this realm, shall 
have full power and authority, from 
time to time, to visit, repress, re 
dress, reform, order, correct, restrain, 
and amend all such errors, heresies, 
abuses, offences, contempts, and enor 
mities, whatsoever they be, which 
by any manner, spiritual authority, 
or jurisdiction, ought or may be 
lawfullv reformed." 

3 26 Henry VIII. c. 3. 

* Ibid., 19. " The king s majesty, 
his heirs and successors, kings of 
this realm, for more augmentation 
and maintenance of the royal estate 
of his imperial crown and dignity of 

supreme head of the Church of Eng 
land, shall yearly have, take, enjoy, 
and receive, united and knit to his 
imperial crown for ever, one yearly 
rent or pension, amounting to the 
value of the tenth part of all the 
revenues, rents, farms, tithes, offer 
ings, emoluments, and all other pro 
fits, as well called spiritual as tem 
poral, now appertaining and belong 
ing, or that hereafter shall belong, 
to any archbishopric, bishopric, ab 
bacy, monastery, priory, archdea 
conry, deanery, hospital, college, 
house collegiate, prebend, cathedral 
church, collegiate church, conventual 
church, parsonage, vicarage, chaun- 
try, free chapel, or other benefice or 
promotion spiritual, of what name, 
nature, or quality soever they be, 
within any diocese of this realm, or 
in Wales." This followed upon the 
petition of the clergy in convocation, 
in which they prayed the head of 
the Anglican Church to deprive the 
Pope of the first-fruits, and if the 
Pope refuse to issue the Bulls to the 
bishops in consequence, to " ordain 
in this present Parliament, that then 
the obedience of him and the people 
be withdrawn from the See of Rome, 
as in like case the French king with 
drew his obedience of him and his 
subjects from Pope Benedict XIII. of 
that name." "Wilkins, Conc.,iii. 761. 


name of the Pope was blotted out of all calendars, in 
dexes, the fathers, the canon law, and the schoolmen. 
People were forced to write in the beginning of their 
copies of the works of St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, St. 
Jerome, St. Augustin, St. Leo, St. Gregory, and St. 
Prosper, that if the books contained anything in defence 
or confirmation of the authority of the primacy of the 
Koman Pontiff, they rejected that word, opinion, or 
reason at once, and would not be guilty of so great a 
crime. 1 

Most of the bishops and the other prelates whose duty 
it was to withstand these things, from the first thought 
it best to give way for a time till the king changed 
his mind, or some Catholic prince came to the rescue of 
the Christian religion. But they waited in vain for the 
emperor or any other, for they had sinned so grievously 
against God and their neighbour. Still there was a 
holy remnant left in the land, which had utterly refused 
to bend the knee before Baal. 2 

1 Jenkyns (Cranmer s Remains, i. books also, and showed them the 
269-271) has printed a formal com- place where such names were, and 
plaint from Oxford, made to Cran- also commanded them that they 
mer, of the retention of the Pope s should amend their said books, and 
name in books. One man says an- I discharged the parish priest of his 
other " should make satisfaction for service at the same time." Again 
the putting out of the word Pope (ibid., 279), " I have committed two 
in St. Gregory s works in our li- priests unto the castle of Canterbury 
brary." Again, " Pope was written for permitting the bishop of Rome s 
into a calendar of a book in our col- name in their books." Anton, 
lege chapel after it had been once "Wood, Annals, ii. 59, 60 : " The 
put out." One is accused of saying generality, though Roman Catholics, 
"it is not necessary to put out Pope did, out of fear of the king, deny 
out of profane books." Cranmer in him, promising withal under their 
a letter to Cromwell, June 12, 1538 hands that none of them would call 
(Jenkyns, i. 247), says, "I lodged him by the name of t Pope. ... So 
at my house in Croydon, when cer- zealous were many against the Pope 
tain of my chaplains by chance went that all memory of him they obliter- 
into the church there, and as they ated, whether it were by pictures in 
looked in certain books, they found glass windows or on signposts, or 
the names of bishops of Rome not whether by name in printed or writ- 
put out according to the king s com- ten service-books or parchments or 
mandment, wherefore I sent for all other things." 
he priests of the church, and their 2 i Reg. xix. 18 ; Rom. xi. 4. 



ON the 2Qth day of April five most saintly men entered 
the glorious lists for Christ. Of these, three were priors 
of three monasteries of the Carthusians : l John Hough- 
ton, 2 prior of London ; Kobert Laurence, prior of Beau- 
vale ; and Augustin Webster, prior of Axholme. 3 They 
would not acknowledge the impious supremacy claimed 
by Henry VIII. in the Church, and for their refusal 
they obtained the palm of martyrdom. 4 

1 The three priors, in their sim 
plicity, went to Cromwell when 
they knew how angry the king was, 
and begged him to help and obtain 
for them some mitigation of the 
oath. The vicar - general of the 
supreme head of the Church of 
England ordered them forthwith 
into the Tower. After a week s 
detention Cromwell arrived with 
some members of the privy council 
to demand the oath, the acceptance 
of the royal supremacy, and the 
renunciation of the Pope. They 
promised to do everything permitted 
by the law of God. "I will have 
no exceptions," said Cromwell, "it 
must be done whether the law of 
God allows it or not." The priors 
replied that the Catholic Church 
held and taught a contrary doctrine. 
"What do I care for the Church?" 
cried Cromwell ; " will you take the 
oath or not]" Chauncy, Passio 
xviii. Carthusianorum, cap. x. 

2 John Houghton was born in 
Essex, and educated at Cambridge. 

He hid himself with a devout priest 
to avoid the state, of marriage pro 
posed to him by his parents. On 
being ordained priest, he returned to 
them, and obtained their forgiveness. 
He went to the Carthusians when he 
was twenty-eight years old, and the 
rest of his life was spent in peace 
and holiness till he was singled out 
for martyrdom. He was tried in 
Westminster Hall April 29, and 
martyred May 4, 1535, with the 
other two priors. 

3 Foxe, v. 101. "Besides and 
with these priors suffered likewise 
at the same time two other priests, 
one called Eeginald, brother of Sion, 
the other named John Haile, vicar 
of Thistleworth [Isleworth]. Divers 
other Charterhouse monks, also of 
London, were then put in prison, to 
the number of nine or ten, and in 
the same prison died." 

4 The charge was that they said, 
" The king our sovereign lord is 
not supreme head in earth of the 
Church of England." They were 



[BOOK i. 

To this blessed company was added [Richard] Rey 
nolds, a Brigittine monk of the abbey of Sion, 1 a great 
theologian, who, as he had often before edified the 
people by his most eloquent sermons, so did he edify 
them now by his example and patient endurance. 2 

He, when he heard his sentence, which was that of 
death, said, "I believe I shall see the good things of 
our Lord in the land of the living ; " 3 and at the place 
of execution he begged the people to make continual 
prayer to God for the king, that he who was like 
Solomon in wisdom and goodness when he began to 
reign, might riot, through the blandishments of women, 
fall away like Solomon at the end of his life. 

The fifth priest who suffered at the same time was 
John Hale, 4 who having striven lawfully, obtained the 
reward of the heavenly calling. 6 

tried at Westminster, April 29, 1535, 
and found guilty. See Third Re 
port of the Deputy Keeper of the 
Records, App. ii. p. 238. 

1 The monastery of Sion, near 
Isleworth, was founded by Henry 
V., 1414. On the dissolution it 
passed into the hands of the duke 
of Somerset, from whom it passed to 
the duke of Northumberland, who 
set up Jane Grey as queen. The 
nuns returned to Sion under queen 
Mary, but under Elizabeth they were 
forced to depart. 

2 Burnet, who did not know him, 
says contemptuously of him (Hist. 
Reform., i. p. 562) that he "was 
esteemed a learned man for that 
time and that order." But the 
writer of the " Expositio Fidelis de 
Morte Thomse Mori," who knew 
him, says, " Vir angelico vultu et 
angelico spiritu sanique judicii, quod 
ex illius colloquio comperi, quum in 
comitatu Cardinalis Campegii ver- 
sarer in Anglia." 

3 Ps. xxvi. 13. He asked the 
judges to give him two or three days 

to make his preparation for death, 
and was told that it rested with the 
king, upon which he made the ob 
servation in the text. Illust. Eccles. 
Tropheea, sig. D. Monachii, 1573. 

4 Baga de Secretis, pouch 7, bundle 
i, Third Report of the Deputy 
Keeper. John Hale, late of Isleworth, 
clerk, was indicted under the act 
for the establishment of the king s 
succession, and pleaded guilty, April 
2 9> J 535> an( i judgment was given 
as usual in cases of high treason. 
Stow, p. 571 : "The 29th of April, 
John, prior of the Charterhouse of 
London ; Augustine Webster, prior 
of Bevall ; Thomas Laurence, prior 
of Exham ; Ric. Reginalds, doctor, a 
monk of Sion ; and John Haile, 
vicar of Thistleworth, were all con 
demned of treason, who were drawn, 
hanged, and quartered at Tyborne 
the 4th of May, their heads and 
quarters set on the gates of the 
city, all save one quarter, which 
was set on the Charterhouse at 

5 Philip, ii. 5. 


These were the first-fruits of the martyrs in the new 
schism of Henry VIII. 

On the 1 8th day of June 1 following, three other 
Carthusians Humfrey Middlemore, William Exmew, 
and Sebastian Newdigate bore witness to the faith in 
the same noble way. 2 

They had been, for fourteen days before they were 
put to death, forced to stand upright, without the possi 
bility of stirring for any purpose whatever, held fast by 
iron collars on their necks, arms, and thighs. These 
three were dragged on hurdles through the streets of 
London to the place of execution together with William 
Home 3 and when they had been hung for awhile, 
were cut down, being yet alive. Then the executioner 
mutilated their persons, 4 and threw into the fire that 
which he had cut off. That done, he laid their bodies 
open with a sword, wrenched out the entrails, and threw 
them into the fire before their eyes. Finally, he cut off 
their heads, and divided their bodies into four quarters, 
which were first boiled, and then hung up in divers 
places to be seen of the people. 

1 According to Chauncy (Passio 1537, with the others mentioned 
xviii. Carthusianorum, cap. xi.), it below, who were literally starved to 
was the I9th of June. death. William Home bore the 

2 They were tried and found guilty hunger and thirst better, and when 
of treason, June 11,1535. And their his companions had given up their 
crime was saying (Third Report, souls to God, received better treat- 
&c., p. 240), "I cannot, nor will, ment, for he lived four years in 
consent to be obedient to the king s prison, and was martyred Nov. 4, 
highness, as a true, lawful, and 1541. 

obedient subject, to take and repute 4 This insulting cruelty seems to 

him to be supreme head in earth of have been inflicted on a priest hi 

the Church of England under Christ." Ireland as late as 1777. These are 

Stow, p. 571 : "The i8th of June the words, in a letter to Cardinal 

three monks of the Charterhouse at Castelli, of Dr. James Butler, second 

London, named Thomas Exmew, archbishop of Cashel of that name 

Humfrey Middlemore, and Sebastian (Dr. Reneham, Collections, p. 331) : 

Nidigate, were drawn to Tiborne, " Sacerdotes Catholicos, quorum unus 

and there hanged and quartered for ex nostra provincia ad patibulum, 

denying the king s supremacy." capitisque ac membrorum abscis- 

3 William Home was a lay brother, sionem damnatus, infamem cruen- 
He was sent to Newgate, May 29, tamque haiic mortem perpessus est." 


John Eochester and James Waiver they also were 
Carthusians obtained favour in the eyes of the king, 
for they were sent to heaven, being simply hanged. 1 

Now, whether the tyrant was ashamed of so much 
slaughtering done in the sight of the people, or of 
slaughtering Carthusians only, he had the death of nine 
other Carthusians brought about by the foulness of the 
prison in which he held them, that they might not 
triumph publicly over him. These were John Bere, 
Thomas Green way, John Davis, William Greenwood, 
Thomas Scriven, Eobert Salt, Walter Person, and Thomas 
Eeding. 2 So far as to the Carthusians ; for though they 
did not all suffer death on the same day, yet I did not 
like to keep asunder in my story those whom the same 
faith and the same order had joined together. 

The bishop of Eochester and Sir Thomas More were 
still in prison : two most shining lights of all Eng 
land, and towards whom men s eyes and thoughts were 
directed. Henry was well aware of this, and was 
therefore the more desirous of winning them over to his 
side, especially Sir Thomas More, who, being a layman, 
was more in favour with lay people, and for very good 
reasons, because no such layman had ever been born 
in England. Henry, too, liked laymen better, and was 
more afraid of them. 

Sir Thomas was born in London of a very honourable 
house, well instructed also in the Greek and Latin 

1 They had been sent from the to give, namely, Thomas Johnson. 
Charterhouse of London, in which Their companion already mentioned, 
they had made their profession, to William Home, outlived them. John 
Hull ; from Hull they were taken Bere, Thomas Johnson, and Thomas 
to York, where, in the presence of Greenway were priests, John Davis 
the duke of Norfolk, they were hung a deacon, the rest being lay brothers, 
in chains, May 11, 1537, till every Their sufferings in prison may be 
bone in their bodies fell detached gathered from the " Life of Mother 
from the rest to the ground. Margaret Clement," published by the 
Chauncy, c. xiii. Rev. Fr. Morris in his " Troubles 

2 The author has omitted one of of our Catholic Forefathers," ist 
the nine whose names he meant Series. 


tongues, and conversant with public affairs for nearly 
forty years. He had discharged the honourable duties 
of ambassador, and had filled with the applause of all 
men the highest offices in the state. Though he was 
twice married, and was the father of many children, he 
was never careful about increasing his means ; and he 
never added even twenty pounds a year to his patrimony. 
Henry sent many of the nobles to him, but to no pur 
pose ; and unable to make up his mind whether it would 
be more to his advantage to let so illustrious an enemy 
of his adultery live on, or to brand himself with shame 
for putting out so shining a light of the Christian world, 
he resolved at last to put to death the bishop of Eo- 
chester first, to see whether More afterwards could be 
made to change his opinion. He had heard by this 
time that the bishop had been made a Cardinal, 1 and as 
for breaking his resolution, there was not the slightest 
hope that he could ever do it. 2 

There was not in England a more holy and learned 
man than John Fisher, bishop of Eochester. He was 
now worn out by age, and though he had been offered 
more than once a better endowed see, he could never be 
persuaded to leave the poor church to which God had 
first called him. He would not acknowledge the ecclesi 
astical supremacy of the king, 3 and for that refusal was 

1 He was made a Cardinal "by Paul speaks otherwise of Anne Boleyn : 
III., May 21, 1535, by the title of <k This woman, which at such time, as 
St. Vitalis. with her playing, singing, and dancing 

2 George Wyatt, Memoir of Queen she had best opportunity, never ceased 
Anne Boleyn, App., Cavendish, ed. as the other dancing damsel that 
Singer, p. 438, says, " It is here to craved St. John Baptist s head to 
be noticed, that of her time that is, crave the good bishop s and Sir 
during the three years she was queen. Thomas More s heads, which thing 
is found by good observation that at length, to their immortal glory, 
no one suffered for religion, which is she compassed. Ere the year turned 
the more worthy to be noted for that about, to her perpetual shame and 
it could not be said of any time ignominy, she lost her head also, as 
of the queens after married to the did the foresaid dancing damsel." 
king." But Harpsfield (Treatise of 3 Baga de Secretis, ut supra, p. 
Marriage, bk. iii. p. 60, Eyston MS.) 239. " That John Fissher, late of 


tried 1 and condemned, and led forth to death, June 22d. 
As soon as he came in sight of the place where he was 
to be conqueror in the glorious contest, he threw his 
staff away, saying, " Now my feet must do their duty, 
for I have but a little way to go." Having reached the 
place of his martyrdom, he lifted up his eyes to heaven 
and said, " Te Deum laudamus,Te Dominum confitemur" 
When he had finished the hymn he bowed his head 
beneath the sword of the executioner, gave up his soul 
to God, and received the crown of justice. His head, 
fixed on a pike, was exposed to the sight of all on Lon 
don Bridge, but was afterwards taken away, because it 
was said that the longer it remained the more ruddy and 
venerable it seemed to grow. 2 

The day on which the bishop was to die had, by order 
of the king, been kept secret from Sir Thomas More ; 
nevertheless he was told of it, and then, overcome by a 
great fear that he was not to gain the crown of martyr 
dom himself, began to pray, saying, " I confess to Thee, 

Lord, that I am not worthy of so great a crown, for 

1 am not just and holy as is Thy servant the bishop of 
Rochester, whom Thou hast chosen for Thyself out of 
the whole kingdom, a man after Thine own heart; never- 

tlie city of Rochester, in the county by the northe dore. And the 26th 

of Kent, clerk, also called John day of the same month, was be- 

Fissher, late of the city of Rochester, heddyd at Towre hill Sir Thomas 

bishop; treacherously imagining and More, sometime chaunsler of Yng- 

attempting to deprive the king of land ; and then was tayne up the 

his title as supreme head of the byshoppe agayne, and both of them 

Church of England, did, yth May, 27 burryd within the Tower." 

Henr. VIIL, at the Tower of London, 1 The bishopric had been declared 

openly say and declare, in English, by act of Parliament vacant from 

The king our sovereign lord is not January 2d, and he was arraigned 

supreme head in earth of the Church not as bishop, but as John Fisher, 

of England. " He was tried June 17, clerk, and because deprived of his 

;and found guilty. Chronicle barony, was n 
e Grey Friars, London, p. 38 : but by a jury. 

1535, and found guilty. Chronicle barony, was not tried by the Peers, 
of the Grey Friars, London, p. 38 : but by a jury. 
Also this yere, the 22d day of July, 2 The fact is recorded also in the 

was the byshoppe of Rochester, John accounts of Fisher and More, pub- 
Fycher, beheddyd at Towre hill, and lished by Mr. Pocock, Records, ii. 
buried in the churchyard of Berkyne, 556. 


theless, Lord, if it be Thy will, give me a share in 
Thy chalice." 

He wept while uttering these words and others of a 
like nature ; his countenance also, at other times so 
calm, betrayed the sorrow he could not hide, and the 
children of this world imagined that he was afraid of 
death, and might therefore be won over to obey the 
king. Many of the chief nobles went to see him, for the 
purpose of winning him over ; but when they could not 
succeed in the slightest degree, they intrusted the matter 
at last to Alice, his wife, 1 who was to persuade her 
husband not to give up herself, his children, his country, 
and his life, which he might still enjoy for many years 
to come. As she harped on this, More said to her, 
"And how long, my dear Alice, do you think I shall 
live ? " "If God will," she answered, " you may live for 
twenty years." "Then," said Sir Thomas, "you would 
have me barter eternity for twenty years ; you are not 
skilful at a bargain, my wife. If you had said twenty 
thousand years, you might have said something to the 
purpose ; but even then, what is that to eternity ? " 

When it became clear that Sir Thomas More was not 
to be shaken in his resolution, he was deprived of all 
his books, 2 which were regarded as instrumental in with 
drawing him from the love of this world, and kindling 
within him the desire of everlasting life. Thereupon he 
closed the windows of his prison, and spent the whole of 
his time with God in holy meditation. The jailer asked 
him why he sat in the dark ; he replied that there was 
nothing else for him to do, for the "shop must be shut 
when the goods are gone." By goods he meant his 

1 Alice Middeton. She was the solicitor-general, who was afterwards 
second wife of Sir Thomas, and was made Lord Rich, Sir Richard South- 
herself a widow when he married well, and Mr. Palmer, employed by 
her. Cromwell. Roper s Life, p. 65. 

2 This was done by Rich, the Dublin,;, 176 5. 


books, and truly Sir Thomas had opened a shop in his 
prison, where he purposed to sell all that he had, that 
he might possess himself of heaven with the price. He 
wrote two books during his imprisonment one in Eng 
lish, " Comfort in Tribulation ;" * the other in Latin, on 
the Passion of Christ. When he had written the story 
of the Passion as far as those words of the gospel, " They 
laid hands on Jesus," 2 hands were laid upon him, and 
he was not allowed to add another word. 

In the course of his trial he was asked in court what 
he thought of the law enacted after his imprisonment 
by which the whole authority of the Pope was set 
aside, and by which the supreme power over the 
Church was vested in the king ; he replied, that he did 
not know of any law of the kind. The judge interposed 
and said, " But we tell you that such a law exists, what 
do you think of it ? " More replied, " If you treated 
me as a free man, I would have believed you on your 
word when you tell me that there is a law to that effect; 
but you have cut me off from your community, and you 
have shut me up in jail, not as a stranger but as an 
enemy. I am civilly dead ; how is it that you question 
me concerning the laws of your state, as if I were still 
a member of the community ? " The judge lost his 
temper and said, " Now I see, you dispute the law, for 
you are silent." Then said Sir Thomas, "If I am 
silent, that is to your advantage, and that of the law ; 
for silence is consent." " Then," said the judge, " do 
you acknowledge the law ? " " How can I do that," 
answered Sir Thomas, " seeing that no man can acknow 
ledge anything of which he is ignorant ? " 

Sir Thomas More framed his answers in this way on 
purpose, that he might not deny the faith on the one 

1 A Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation. 
z St. Matt. xxvi. 50. 


hand, nor on the other hand court his death ; for 
though he had a great longing for martyrdom, he never 
forgot that it was a grace from God. In the uncertainty 
he was in, as he often said, whether God would give 
him this grace, he answered modestly as I have shown. 

When at last the judge called on the twelve men in 
whose province it lies to decide the question of life and 
death, these men brought in a verdict of death against 
Sir Thomas More. Thereupon he, now more sure of 
his state, told them frankly what he thought of that 
law. "I," said he, "have by the grace of God been 
always a Catholic, never out of the communion of the 
Eoman Pontiff, but I had heard it said at times that 
the authority of the Eoman Pontiff was certainly lawful 
and to be respected, but still an authority derived from 
human law, and not standing on a divine prescription. 
Then when I observed that public affairs were so ordered 
that the sources of the power of the Koman Pontiff 
would necessarily be examined, I gave myself up to a 
most diligent examination of that question for the space 
of seven years, and found that the authority of the 
Koman Pontiff, which you rashly I will not use 
stronger language have set aside, is not only lawful, 
to be respected, and necessary, but also grounded on 
the divine law and prescription. That is my opinion ; 
that is the belief in which by the grace of God I shall 

He had hardly ended his answer when they all cried 
out that More was a traitor and a rebel. 

On his return from the court he was met by his 
daughter Margaret, whom he loved so much, whom he 
had taught both Greek and Latin, and to whom he had 
often written when he was in prison. She had come to 
bid him her last farewell. The father stood, and not 
only did not refuse the kiss of his child, but gave her 


his blessing. The wife 1 of John Harris, who had been 
secretary to Sir Thomas More, was there with Margaret, 
and being afraid that Sir Thomas would go away after 
kissing his child, and that she should not be able to say 
farewell herself, suddenly seized the head of Sir Thomas, 
as he was leaning over his daughter s shoulder, and with 
great affection kissed her master before all the people, 
upon which Sir Thomas said to her, "Kindly meant, 
but not politely done." 

He was led to the place of execution on the 6th day 
of July. When he came to the foot of the scaffold, and 
saw that it would not be easy for him to mount, he 
called to one of the attendants, and said, " I beg you 
will help me to get up ; as for coming down, you may 
leave me alone for that." When he had ended his 
prayer, had called the people to witness that he was 
going to die in the Catholic faith, and had said the psalm 
Miserere, the executioner came forward, and, according 
to the custom, asked him to forgive him. That done, 
he struck off the head of justice, of truth, and of good 
ness. All England mourned the dead, regarding the 
blow as having fallen not so much upon the martyr of 
Christ as upon itself. 2 

1 Dorothy Colley. Fr. Morris, within the realm, intending thereby 

Troubles of our Catholic Forefathers, not only the destruction of the king, 

p. 5. but also the whole subversion of his 

52 Cromwell thus defends the highness realm, being explained and 
king s conduct (Burnet, Hist. Kef., declared, and so manifestly proved 
vi. 117, ed. Pocock) : "And con- afore them, that they could not 
cerning the executions done within avoid nor deny it ; and they thereof 
this realm, ye shall say to the said openly detected and lawfully con- 
French king that the same were not victed, adjudged, and condemned of 
so marvellous extreme as he allegeth. high treason by the due order of the 
For touching Mr. More and the laws of this realm, it shall and may 
bishop of Eochester, with such well appear to all the world that 
others as were executed here, their they, having such malice rooted in 
treasons, conspiracies, practices se- their hearts against their prince and 
cretly practised, as well within the sovereign, and the total destruction 
realm as without, to move and stir of the commonwealth of this realm, 
dissension, and to sow sedition were well worthy, if they had had a 


Early in the morning of that day his daughter went 
about from church to church, and gave large alms to the 
poor. When she had given all that she had, and was at 
prayer in church, she said to her maid, " Ah me ! I have 
forgotten the shroud for my father s body." She had 
heard that the body of the bishop of Eochester had been 
laid in the ground without cross or lights, unattended 
by a priest, and that no one came to bury the holy 
martyr. Indeed no one dared to render him that service, 
for the fear of Henry s cruelty had fallen upon all. 
Margaret took care that her father should not be treated 
in the same way. 

Her maid recommended her to provide herself with 
linen at the nearest shop. " How can I do that," she 
replied, "when I have no money left?" The maid 
said, "They will trust you." "I have no money," was 
the answer of Margaret ; " and though I am far from 
home, and the people here do not know me, yet I will 
try them." She then entered a shop in the neighbour 
hood, asked for as much linen as she thought was 
necessary, and settled about the price. Then, as if look 
ing for her money, she put her hand in her purse, in 
order to be able to say that to her great disappointment 
she had none ; however, if they would trust her, they 
should be paid without delay. But lo ! she who knew 
too well that a few minutes before there was nothing in 
her purse, now found in it the price of the linen, neither 
more nor less than the sum she was then bound to pay. 
Comforted by the miracle, she took up the linen, wrapt 
her father s body therein, and honourably buried the 
martyr of Christ. No one disturbed her in her pious 

thousand lives, to have suffered ten suffer." It is plain that Cromwell 
times a more terrible death and understood his business as well as 
execution than any of them did any modern minister of state. 



[BOOK i. 

duty, for they respected the woman, especially the 
child. 1 

1 The trial took place on the ist 
of July 1535, and (Stow, p. 572) 

> 5; 

3 M( 

" the 6th of July Sir Thomas More 
was beheaded on the Tower hill for 
the like denial of the king s supre 
macy : and then the body of Doctor 

Fisher, bishop of Eochester, was 
taken by and buried with Sir Thomas 
More, both in the Tower." Stow 
probably copied the Grey Friars 
Chronicle ; see the latter part of 
note 3, p. 122. 

129 ) 





IN the month of October following [A.D. 1535], Henry, 
as supreme head of the Church, determined to make a 
visitation of the religious houses. One Lee, therefore, 
a doctor of the civil law, but not in holy orders, was 
sent to make inquiries into the life and conversation of 
monks and nuns. 

For the making of this visitation, instructions * were 
given that any one under four-and-twenty years of age 
might be compelled to leave the monastery and return 
to the world, and that he who was above that age might 
also leave it with impunity if he liked, but such a one 
was not to be compelled to leave. If any one left the 
monastery, to him the abbot was to give the dress of a 

1 A letter of Cranmer to Crom- induct! stint, et si qui alii sub vice- 
well (Jenkyns, Cranmer s Eemains, simo quarto anno existentes disce- 
i. 1 56), who was asked by the former dere velint, illam quamprimum se 
to settle a doubt that had been exuant. Et magister hujus doinus 
raised, supplies the clause in the in- suo sumptu vestibus ssecularibus et 
junctions to which the author refers : honestis ad prsesens ornet et ad ami- 
" Item quod nullus deinceps permit- cos suos chariores cum viaticis com- 
tatur profiteri regularem observan- petentibus transmittendos curet." 
tiam aut vestem suscipere religionis Cranmer says to Cromwell, " I will 
per confratres hujus domus gestari not take upon me to make any ex- 
solitam, nisi vicesimum suse cetatis position herein, but such as you 
annum compleverit. Et si, qui jam shall make, by whose authority the 
sub vicesimo anno complete in veste injunctions were given." The letter 
hujusmodi infra hanc domum jam is dated Nov. 18, 1535. 




[BOOK i. 

secular priest, instead of the habit of the order, and 
about eight pieces of gold ; but the nuns were to wear 
the dress of women living in the world. 1 Finally, all 
monks and all nuns, of what order soever, were to 
deliver into the hands of the king s agents all the orna 
ments of price belonging to their churches, together 
with the relics of the saints. 2 Lee, indeed, in order to 
discharge correctly the duties laid upon him, tempted 
the religious to sin, and he was more ready to inquire 
into and speak about uncleanness of living than any 
thing else. 

That visitation had for its end to enable the king 
to destroy every monastery the possessions of which he 
coveted. Accordingly, on the 4th of February, after 
the publication of the enormities of the religious, 3 partly 
discovered and partly invented, all the monasteries the 

1 Hooper, in a letter to Bullinger 
from Strasburg (Original Letters, 
No. 21), whither he had fled from 
justice, says: "Our king has de 
stroyed the Pope, but not Popery ; 
he has expelled all the monks and 
nuns, and pulled down their monas 
teries ; he has caused all their pos 
sessions to be transferred into his 
exchequer ; and yet they are bound, 
even the frail female sex, by the 
king s command, to perpetual chas 
tity. England has at this time at 
least ten thousand runs, not one of 
whom is allowed to marry." The 
letter was written in 1 546, after the 
ruin of the greater monasteries. 

2 Foxe, Acts and Monuments, v. 
102, ed. Cattley. "Whereupon, the 
same year, the month of October, 
the king having then Thomas Crom 
well of "his council, sent Dr. Lee to 
visit the abbeys, priories, and nun 
neries in all England, and to set at 
liberty all such religious persons as 
desired to be free, and all others that 
were under the age of four-and- 
twenty years : providing withal 

that such monks, canons, and friars 
as were dismissed should have given 
them by the abbot or prior, instead 
of their habit, a secular priest s gown 
and forty shillings of money ; and 
likewise the nuns to have such ap 
parel as secular women did then 
commonly use, and be suffered to go 
where they would. At which time 
also from the said abbeys and monas 
teries were taken their chief jewels 
and relics." 

3 Even Latimer (Sermons, p. 123, 
ed. Parker Society) insinuates the 
dishonesty of this visitation. "I 
would not," said he, "that ye should 
do with chantry priests as ye did 
with the abbots when the abbevs 
were put down. For when the"ir 
enormities were first read in the par 
liament house, they were so great 
and abominable that there M as no 
thing but down with them ! But 
within awhile after, the same ab 
bots were made bishops, as there be 
some of them yet alive, to save their 
pensions. Lord ! think ye that 
God is a fool, and seeth it not ? " 


revenues of which were not valued above two hundred 
pounds a year, 1 were by act of Parliament placed at 
the mercy of the king. 2 

On the 6th of January in this year queen Catherine 
died at Kimbolton, and was buried at Peterborough. 3 
Upon her deathbed she wrote to the king to this effect : 
"My lord, king Henry, the love which I bear you makes 
me now, when the hour of my death is drawing nigh, 
put you in mind of your soul s salvation, which you 
should prefer to all things in the world. I forgive you 
myself, and I pray God to forgive you. I recommend 
to you our child, my three maids, and all my servants. 
Let the former be well provided in marriage ; and let 
the latter have a year s wages in addition to what is due 
to them now." 

The king could not refrain from tears when he read 
the letter ; 4 but Anne Boleyn, instead of putting on 
mourning on the day of Catherine s funeral, put on a 

1 Stow, p. 572. " The number of 
these houses then suppressed was 
376, the value of their lands ^32,000 
and more by year. The movable 
goods as they were sold, Robin 
Hood s pennyworth amounted to 
more than ,100,000." 

2 A.D. 1536, 27 Hen. VIII. c. 28. 
" To have and to hold all and sin 
gular the premises, with all their 
rights, profits, jurisdictions, and com 
modities, unto the king s majesty 
and his heirs and assigns for ever, 
to do and use therewith his and 
their own wills, to the pleasure of 
Almighty God, and to the honour 
and profit of this realm." Stow, p. 
572 : "A pitiful thing to hear the 
lamentation that the people in the 
country made for them." 

3 London Chronicle, p. 9 ; Cam- 
den Miscellany, vol. iv. "Then 
clyid quene Kateryn about twelfe 
tide, and was beryed in Peterborow 
Abbey." Lord Herbert says she died 
Jan. 8th ; but Polvdore Vergil (bk. 

xxvii. p. 690), who was in England at 
the time, says with Sander, that she 
died " ad viii. idus Januarii " the 
8th day of January 1535, according 
to the calendar of those days, when 
the 25th of March was New- Year s 
Day. Wriothesley, in his Chronicle 
of England, p. 32, Camden Society, 
says she died " the morrowe after 
twelve daie, being Fridaie, and the 
7th daie of Januarie ; " and the edi 
tor, Mr. Hamilton, in a note, says 
that there is a letter to Cromwell in 
the Public Record Office, in which 
it is said that she died on the 7th, 
" before 2 of the clock at afternoon." 
4 Harpsfielcl, bk. ii. p. 1 37. " At the 
reading of which letter the king burst 
out a weeping. Her dead corpse was 
carried to Peterborough, and there 
interred. Before she departed at 
Kimbolton, she had lain two years at 
Bugden, passing her solitary life in 
much prayer, great alms, and abstin 
ence ; and when she was not this way 
occupied, then was she and her gentle- 


yellow dress ; l and on being congratulated on the re 
moval of her rival, replied, " No, I am sorry, not indeed 
because she is dead, but because her death has been so 
honourable." 2 What malice! even the death of Cath 
erine could not quench it. 

It often happens that we are on the brink of ruin when 
we consider ourselves most secure. Anne Boleyn seemed 
now to be delivered from all fear of any rival. But God 
is just ; He raised up another rival to her forthwith, and 
a more dangerous rival than Catherine had ever been ; 
for the king began to grow weary of Anne, and to give 
his affections to another woman. 

The time had now come when Anne was to be again 
a mother, but she brought forth only a shapeless mass 
of flesh. 3 The king, bent on seeing the child of Anne, 
went at once into her room to do so, when she, bewail 
ing her mishap, and angry at the transference to another 
of the king s affections, cried out to him, " See, how well 
I must be since the day I caught that abandoned 
woman Jane sitting on your knees." The king answered 
her by saying, " Be of good cheer, sweetheart, you will 
have no reason to complain of me again," 4 and went 
away sorrowing. 

But when Anne saw that she had hitherto not been 
the mother of a boy to Henry, and that now there was 

women working with their own hands the time will coine shortly when you 

something wrought in needlework, shall have much need to pity and 

costly and artificially, which she in- lament her case. 5 " 

tended to the honour of God to be- 3 Stow, p. 372. "The 29th of 

stow upon some churches." January, queen Anne was delivered 

1 Hall, 8 1 8. "Queen Anne wore of a man-child before her time, 
yellow for the mourning." which was born dead." 

2 Queen Catherine was more gener- 4 Wyatt s Memoir of Anne Boleyn, 
ous, according to Harpsfield (bk. ii. Singer s Cavendish, p. 443. " TJn- 
p. 138), who says, "I have credibly kindness grew, and she was brought 
also heard that at a time when one abed before her time with much peril 
of her gentlewomen began to curse of her life, and of a male child dead 
the lady Anne Bulleyne, she [Cath- born, to her greater and most extreme 
erine] answered, Hold your peace, grief. Being thus a woman full of 
curse her not, but pray for her, for sorrow, it was reported that the king 


no hope of her ever being so, she resolved to try whether, 
in some way or other, she, who was the wife of a king, 
might not become the mother of a king also. She con 
sidered that her sin would be more secret if she sinned 
with her own brother, George Boleyn, rather than with 
any other. Besides, she was a woman excessively given 
to pride and to self-love, and so she would have the next 
king of England to be a Boleyn by the father s and the 
mother s side. But as her incest prospered not, she 
gave herself up to a lewd life, having not only Norris, 
Weston, and Brereton, who were gentlemen, but also 
.Mark her musician, as her companions in sin. 

This wicked living could not long be kept hid from 
the king. Nevertheless he pretended to know nothing 
of it till the ist day of May. On that day he was pre 
sent at a tournament held at Greenwich, and saw Anne 
Boleyn, who was at a window looking on, drop her 
handkerchief, that one of her lovers might wipe his 
face running with sweat. Thereupon the king rose in a 
hurry, and with six attendants went straight to West 
minster. 1 

But on the next day Anne was led into prison, and 
bj 7 Sir Thomas Boleyn 2 himself, sitting among the judges 

came to her, and bewailing and com- fore was one of the judges who 

plaining unto her the loss of his boy, found Anne guilty by necessary im- 

some words were heard break out of plication. But on the trial of Lord 

the inward feelings of her heart s Eochford and of Anne, Sir Thomas 

dolours, laying the fault upon un- Boleyn was not present, and cannot 

kindness ; ... he was then heard therefore be said to have found 

to say to her, he would have no more Anne guilty of incest. Still all 

boys by her. J these foul charges were known at 

1 Stow, p. 572. "From these jousts the first trial, and Sir Thomas 
king Henry suddenly departed to Boleyn could not have been ignor- 
Westminster, having only with him ant of the effect of the first verdict, 
six persons." Burnet has given correctly the names 

2 The accomplices of Anne Norris, of those who sat as judges of Anne 
Brereton, Weston, and Mark were Boleyn, but he has not said where 
tried before Anne, and found guilty he found them. The " Baga de Sec- 
of adultery. These were tried be- retis" contains the names. See Third 
fore Sir Thomas Boleyn, who there- Eeport of the Deputy Keeper, 1842. 



[BOOK i. 

at the commandment of the king, was found guilty of 
adultery and incest, 1 and was beheaded May 19, having 
borne the title of queen not quite five months after the 
death of Catherine. Not long afterwards Sir Thomas 
Boleyn also died of grief. 2 

The very next day after the execution of Anne Boleyn 
the king made Jane Seymour his wife. He had loved her 
and preferred her to Anne even while Anne was alive. 
The judgments of God are not less marvellous than they 
are just, rewarding every one according to his works. As 
Anne supplanted Catherine, so Jane supplanted Anne. 3 

On the 22cl day of May took place the public execu 
tion of George Viscount Eocheford, brother of Anne 
Boleyn, Henry Norris, William Brereton, Francis Weston, 

1 In the Archaeologia, vol. xxiii., 
is printed a Memorial to Cromwell 
from George Constantyne, who was 
registrar of St. David s, and whose 
daughter was the wife of Young, 
archbishop of York. He was once 
in the service of Norris, and says 
that Mark Smeaton was first appre 
hended, and that he was examined 
on the last day of April. " Upon 
May Day Mr. Norris jousted. And 
after jousting, the king rode sud 
denly to Westminster, and all the 
way, as I heard say, had Norris in 
examination. . . . Mr. Norris would 
confess nothing to the king. . . . 
His chaplain told me he confessed ; 
hut he said at his arraigning, when 
his own confession was laid before 
him, that he was deceived to do the 
same by the earl of Hampton that 
now is." Of Brereton he says, " If 
any of them was innocent, it was 
he? The others " confessed, all but 
Mr. Norris, who said almost nothing 
at all." He says he heard them, and 
" wrote every word that they spoke." 
Lord Eochford said, " I desire you 
that no man will be discouraged 
from the gospel for my fall." Of 
Anne he says, " Her brother and she 
were examined at the Tower. I heard 

say he had escaped had it not been 
for a letter. . . . Now, so because 
that she was a favourer of God s 
Word, at the leastwise so taken, I 
tell you few men would believe that 
she was so abominable. As I be 
saved before God, I could not believe 
it afore I heard them speak at their 

a Stow, p. 572. "After that the 
earl of Wiltshire and Ormond, called 
Sir Thomas Boloigne, had delivered 
the king s privy seal, whereof he was 
custos, into the king s hands, Thomas 
Cromwell, secretary to the king and 
master of the rolls, was made lord 
keeper of the said privy seal." Sir 
Thomas Boleyn died in 1538. 

3 Hall (819), with more ingenuity 
than candour, says, " The week be 
fore Whitsuntide the king married 
lady Jane." Anne Boleyn was put 
to death May 19, 1536, and Jane 
Seymour was married May 20, but 
Whitsuntide fell on June 4. Cran- 
mer, on the very day on which Anne 
Boleyn was executed, granted a dis 
pensation to enable Henry to marry 
Jane Seymour. Chron. Materials of 
the new edition of the Fcedera, p. 
1 88, where it is said that the original 
dispensation is in the Chapter House. 


and Mark [Smeaton] because they had committed 
adultery with Anne Boleyn. 1 

On the 8 th day of June Parliament met by the king s 
command, as well as the convocation of the clergy. 2 In 
both assemblies there were many and long debates 
touching matters of faith and religion, the king and the 
bishops striving to save the schism they had begun from 
issuing in the Lutheran or Calvinistic heresy. In the 
end a book was set forth by public authority with this 
title, "Articles established by the King s Highness." 3 

The first of these articles is, that in the sacrament of 
the Eucharist transubstantiation is to be believed ; the 
second, that communion in one kind is sufficient for 
salvation ; the third, that the celibacy of the priesthood 
must be maintained ; the fourth, that vows of chastity 
and widowhood must be kept ; the fifth, that the cele 
bration of masses is agreeable to the law of God, and 
that private masses also are wholesome and necessary ; 
the sixth, that auricular confession is necessarily to be 

1 Baga de Secretis. " Being ar 
raigned, Smeaton pleads guilty of 
adultery with the queen, but as to 
the other charges in the indictment 
he pleads not guilty. And Noreys, 
Bryerton, and Weston severally plead 
not guilty." Among the judges sat 
Thomas earl of Wilts, and the ver 
dict was guilty, given May 12, 1536. 
Stow, p. 573 : " The i;th day of May, 
the Lord Itochford, brother to the 
queen, Henry Norrice, Mark Smeton, 
William Brierton, and Francis Wes 
ton, all of the king s privy chamber, 
about matters touching the queen, 
were beheaded on the Tower hill ; 
the Lord Rochford s body with the 
head was buried in the chapel of the 
Tower, the other four in the church 
yard there." Raynaldi Annal. Ec- 
clesiast. ad an. 1536, n. 26 : " Auxit 
hsec probra quod Anna Bolena Hen- 
rici spuria existimaretur, idque a 
pueris Parisiensibus cantillaretur 

atque etiam in angiportibus, valvis 
et plateis affixuin epigramma hoc 
prostaret : 

Juno Jovis soror atque uxor, verum 

Anna Bolena 
Et spuria Henrici filia et uxor erat. " 

2 In the session held July 20, 
Edward Fox, bishop of Hereford, 
produced a book in which reasons 
were given why the king should not 
appear in the general council then 
summoned by the Pope, which 
reasons were approved of by Crom 
well the king s vicar, and all the 
members of both Houses. Wilkins, 
Concil., iii. 803. 

3 " Articles devised by the kinges 
highnes Majestic, to stablyshe Chris- 
tin quietness," &c., printed by Ber- 
thelet, the king s printer, London, 
1536. See note in Burnet, Hist. 
Ref., ii. 272, ed. Pocock. Stow, p. 
373 : " In the which book is men 
tioned but three sacraments." 


retained in the Church. If any man taught otherwise, 
he must endure the penalties which the king s highness 
had decreed, with the consent of the Lords and Commons 
in Parliament assembled. 1 

This, in those days, was the state of religion in Eng 
land : on the one hand, at variance with the Catholic 
faith, because men abandoned the supremacy and unity 
of the Chair of Peter, and all the monasteries were 
destroyed ; and on the other hand, very much at vari 
ance, on account of these articles, with the teaching of 
Wicliffites, Lutherans, Zuinglians, and Calvinists. 

Nevertheless, with the single exception of the men of 
easy principles about the court, the old nobility, as well 
as the people generally, not only hating heresy, but 
being almost universally Catholic, 2 regarded it as a matter 
of small moment that certain most detestable opinions 
should be condemned, if they could not have the Catholic 
religion preserved in its integrity. When, therefore, 
they saw that under the cloak of banishing superstition 
nothing else was meant but stealing the sacred vessels, 
the silver crucifixes, the chalices that held the blood of 
Christ, together with all other things by which the 
churches were adorned, they took up arms, first of all in 
the county of Lincoln, then in Northumberland, Cumber 
land, Durham, and York, upwards of fifty thousand 
men. They made it plain to all that they were about 
to fight for the preservation of the faith of Christ, for 

1 Eisliton says that he omitted 2 Hooper, writing to Bullinger, con- 
passages from the text of Sander fesses it (Original Letters, No. 21) in 
when he gave it to his friend to be offensive language : " The impious 
printed. That is probably the reason Mass, the most shameful celibacy of 
why in the text the six articles are the clergy, the invocation of saints, 
represented as forming part of the auricular confession, superstitious 
book published in 1536. The six abstinence from meats, and purga- 
articles were passed, as it is said in tory were never before held by the 
the text, in Parliament, but four people in greater esteem than at the 
years later, namely, in 1540. 31 present moment." 
Henry VIII. c. 14. * 



on their standard were the Five Wounds, the chalice 
with the Host, and the name of Jesus inscribed in the 
centre. 1 

The dukes of Norfolk and of Suffolk, the marquis of 
Exeter, and other of the king s officers marched against 
them; but on the very day when a battle seemed imminent, 
a conference took place, when Henry, afraid of the issues, 2 
promised the Catholic people to redress their grievances, 
and that no one who had been concerned in that rising 
should suffer for it. 3 All this the king confirmed not 
only by public proclamation, but also by letters under 
the great seal; 4 nevertheless, taking advantage of another 
rising not indeed of the same noblemen, but that of 
Nicholas Musgrave and Thomas Gilby 5 he put to death 
those whom he had pardoned 6 before. Among these 

-L O 

were the two Lords Darcy and Hussey, Sir Robert 
Constable, Sir Thomas Percy, Sir Francis Bigot, Sir 
Stephen Hamilton, Sir John Buhner, Sir William 

1 Latimer in a sermon thus speaks 
of these Catholics (Sermons, p. 29, 
ed. Parker Soc.) : "In like manner 
these men in the north country, they 
make pretence as though they were 
armed in God s armour, gird in truth, 
and clothed in righteousness. I hear 
say they wear the cross and the 
wounds before and behind, and they 
pretend much truth to the king s 
grace and to the commonwealth 
when they intend nothing less ; and 
deceive the poor ignorant people, 
and bring them to fight against both 
the king, the Church, and the com 

2 In the report of the sermon 
preached by Gardiner, Dec. 2, 1554, 
at Paul s Cross, when the schism 
was apparently healed, are the fol 
lowing words (Foxe, vi. 578): "When 
the tumult was in the north, in the 
time of king Henry VIII., I am 
sure the king was determined to 
have given over the supremacy again 
to the Pope; but the hour was 

not then come, and therefore it 
went not forward, lest some would 
have said that he did it for fear." 

3 Stow, p. 574. " Sir Robert Aske, 
that was chief of the rebellion, came 
to London, was not only pardoned, 
but rewarded with great gifts." 

4 See below, note 6. 

5 Stow, p. 574. "In the same 
month [Feb. 1537] Nicholas Mus 
grave, Thomas Gilby and others 
stirred a new rebellion, and besieged 
the city of Carlisle." 

fi Lord Herbert, p. 481. ed. 1649. 
The contents of this pardon, dated 
Dec. 9, at Richmond, and sealed with 
the great seal, was, as our records 
show, " that the king granted them 
all a general and free pardon of 
all rebellion, treasons, felonies, and 
trespasses unto the day of the date 
thereof, provided that they make their 
submission to the duke of Norfolk 
and earl of Shrewsbury the king s 
lieutenant and that they rebel no 



[BOOK r. 

Lumley, 1 and Sir Nicholas Tempest ; the two abbots of 
Jervaulx 2 and Kivaulx, 8 and the chief of them all, Eobert 
Aske. 4 

On the loth day of October 5 [1537], Jane Seymour 
gave birth to a sou, who was named Edward. But the 
travail of the queen being very difficult, 6 the king was 
asked which of the t\vo lives was to be spared ; he 
answered, the boy s, because he could easily provide 
himself with other wives. Jane accordingly died soon 
after of the pains of childbirth, and was buried at 

On the 22d day of May [1538] the reverend father 
Forest, 7 of the Order of St. Francis, because he denied 

1 In the indictment (Baga de Se- 
cretis) he is called " George Lumley, 
late of Thwynge, . . . Esquire." 

2 A Cistercian abbey in the East 
Riding of York, by the river Jore, 
now called Ure. The abbot was 
Adam Sadler. Baga de Secretis. 

3 Rivaulx, River, or Rievall, a 
Cistercian abbey, so called from the 
river Rye ; also in Yorkshire. 

4 They were all put to death in 
the month of June 1537. Stow, p. 
574: "Sir Robert Constable at 
Hull, near the gate called Beverley 
gate ; Aske hanged in chains on a 
tower at York. . , . Lord Darcy be 
headed at Tower hill, Lord Hussey 
at Lincoln, and the other six in 
number suffered at Tyborne." 

5 Edward VI. is generally said to 
have been born Oct. 12. Polydore 
Vergil says he was born " iii. idus 
Octobris," which is the i3th, and that 
Jane Seymour died two days after 

6 " All this is false," says Burnet 
(vol. iv. p. 572, ed. Pocock), " for she 
had a good delivery, as many original 
letters written by her council, that 
have been since printed, do show ; 
but she died two days after of a dis 
temper incident to her sex." Hey- 
lyn (Hist. Reform., p. 7) says that the 
common belief has always been that 

a surgical operation took place, which 
cost the queen her life. Harps field, 
writing in the reign of queen Mary, 
speaks of the fact as certain (Treatise of 
Marriage, MS., bk. iii. p. 107) : " That 
she should die for the safeguard of 
the child in such manner as she did, 
yea, the child to be born, as some say 
that adders are, by gnawing out the 
mother s womb." So also the account 
of Fisher and More, printed by Mr. 
Pocock, Records, ii. 564. 

7 John Forest was confessor to 
queen Catherine. He entered the 
order in the seventeenth year of his 
age, and made his profession in the 
house of the Observants at Green 
wich, and became provincial. It is 
said that he submitted to the king, 
but he certainly refused to make his 
abjuration when it was formally pro 
posed to him. He was thrown into 
prison, and Latimer, in his letter to 
Cromwell (Remains, p. 392, Parker 
Society), complains that he was too 
gently treated : " Forest, as I hear, 
is not duly accompanied in Newgate 
for his amendment, with the White 
friars of Doricaster and the monks 
of the Charterhouse ; in a fit cham 
ber more like to indurate than to 
mollify ; whether through the fault 
of the sheriff or of the jailer or both, 
no man could sooner discern than 



the ecclesiastical supremacy of the king, was hung on 
a gallows by two chains around his arms : under his feet 
a fire was kindled, so that he was most cruelly roasted 

Cromwell had now for some years been creeping into 
the king s good graces, and he was a man after the 
king s own heart. Tainted with the heresy of Zuinglius, 
he was the author of almost all the suggestions made to 
the king touching the plundering of the shrines. 1 When 
he saw the images of the saints and the tombs of the mar 
tyrs held in honour by Christians, he felt afraid that too 
much honour was given to the friends of God. He then 
advised the destruction of the images which God had 
made honourable in the eyes of men by great miracles, 
as He had made the Probatica of old in Bethsaida, which 
healed the first person who went down into it on the 
moving of the waters by the angel, of whatever disease 
he had. And with these also the destruction of the 

your lordship. Some think he is 
rather comforted in his way than dis 
couraged : some think he is allowed 
"both to hear Mass and also to receive 
the sacrament; which, if it be so, it 
is enough to confirm him in his ob 
stinacy." Foxe (v. p. 1 80) says he 
was " hanged in Smithfield in chains 
upon a gallows, quick, by the middle 
and armholes, and fire was made 
under him, and so was he consumed 
and burned to death." Collier 
(Eccles. Hist., ii. p. 149) says he " was 
condemned for heresy and high 
treason, though by what law they 
could stretch his crime to heresy is 
hard to discover, for he was tried 
only for dissuading his penitents in 
confession from owning the king s 
supremacy." Latimer preached, and 
lie announces his purpose to Crom 
well in these words : "And, sir, if it 
be your pleasure, as it is, that I shall 
play the fool after my customable 
manner when Forest shall suffer, I 
would wish that my stage stood near 

unto Forest." The martyr received 
his crown after listening to the here 
sies of Latimer, and went home to 
his Father s house in the sixtieth 
year of his age. 

1 Cromwell employed scurrilous 
buffoons to bring the holy images 
into contempt, " in the number of 
whom," says Foxe (v. 403), " were 
sundry and divers fresh and quick 
wits, partaining to his family, by 
whose industry and ingenious labours 
divers excellent ballads and books 
were contrived and set abroad, con 
cerning the suppression of the Pope 
and all Popish idolatry." Foxe then 
inserts in his text one of these 
detestable and impious ballads of 
Cromwell, called the " Fantasy of 
Idolatry," in which the following 
stanza is to be found : 

" At Saint Marget Patons, the Rode is gone 


And stoele away by nyght ; 
With His tabernacle and crose, with all that 

there was 
And is gone away quygte." 


slirines of the martyrs covered with gold and silver. 
Thus the man who pretended to abhor idols, com 
mitted manifest sacrilege. 1 

As Jacob of old, having seen the vision in his sleep, 
on rising set up for a title the stone he had laid under 
his head, pouring oil upon the top of it, and calling the 
place Bethel, that is, the house of God, and returning 
after his vow, offered there his tithes unto God ; 2 and so 
the people who feared God, during many generations 
afterwards, went up to Bethel, that is, to the place which 
the patriarch Jacob had hallowed, carrying with them 
kids, to sacrifice them there unto our Lord ; so the people 
of Christ in England went to pray in certain places where 
the images of our Blessed Lady and the saints had been 
placed, and which had been made famous by the mar 
vellous \vorks of God : such places were Walsingham, 
Ipswich, Worcester, Willesden, Canterbury, and others of 
the same kind. All these were destroyed and desecrated 3 
by Cromwell, in order that he might obtain possession 
of the treasures offered there by the faithful. 4 That was 
not all, for he began on the i6th day of November to 
disturb and destroy the remaining monasteries. This 
was the way in which the king kept the promise he made 
to the people of Yorkshire when they took up arms to 
save the shrines from destruction. 5 

1 Rom. ii. 22. and clivers other images both in 

2 Gen. xxviii. 12. England and Wales, wnereunto any 

3 Hall, 824. In September, by common pilgrimage was used ; for 
the special motion of the Lord Crom- avoiding of idolatry, all which were 
well, all the notable images unto brent at Chelsea by Thomas Crom- 
the which were made many special well, privy seal." 

pilgrimages and offerings were ut- 5 This was the way in which 

terly taken away, as the images of Latimer spoke of the holy images, 

Walsyngham, Ipswich, Worcester, and in which Cromwell delighted, 

the lady of Wilsdon, with many The letter of the former to the latter 

others." was sent from Hartlebury, June 13, 

4 Stow, p. 575. "The images of 1 538 (ed. Parker Soc., p. 395): "I trust 
our Lady of Walsingham and Ipswich your lordship will bestow our great 
were brought up to London with all Sibyll [our Lady of Worcester] to some 
the jewels that hung about them, good purpose, ut pereat memoria cum 



One Lambert, 1 a Zuinglian, was burnt in Smithfield, 
November 22 [1538]. This man, convicted before 
Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, appealed 
to the king, who took cognisance of the cause. The 
matter having been argued before him, he himself 
publicly disputed with Lambert. But the king con 
demned him anew, and the sentence of death was pro 
nounced iii open court by the vicar-general of the king 
in spirituals by Cromwell, who was himself a Zumglian 
in disguise. 

The vicar of Wands worth, the priest who was his curate, 
and his servant, together with a monk whose name was 
Mayer, were put to death July 8 [1538]^ and on the 
1 4th day of November, in the same year, Hugh Faring- 
don, abbot of Heading, and Kichard Whiting, abbot of 
Glastonbury, on the ist of December, John Beche, abbot 
of Colchester, all Benedictines, with two priests, Eugge 

sonitu. She liath been the devil s 
instrument to bring many, I fear, to 
eternal fire : now she herself, with 
her old sister of Walsingham, her 
young sister of Ipswich, with their 
other two sisters of Doncaster and 
Penrice, would make a jolly muster 
in Smithfield : they would not be all 
day in burning." 

1 John Lambert or Nicholson, 
according to Foxe, was bom and 
bred in Norfolk, and perverted by 
Bilney, who seems to have been a 
Lollard. Lambert studied at Cam 
bridge, and became chaplain to the 
English merchants in Antwerp. Sir 
Thomas More had him brought 
home, and the archbishop, Dr. War- 
ham, examined and consigned him 
to prison, out of which he came 
when Cranmer was made arch 
bishop. He then kept a school in 
London, and according to Foxe (v. 
226), " forasmuch as priests in those 
days could not be permitted to have 
wives, he left his priesthood and 
applied himself to that function of 

teaching, intending shortly after also 
to be free of the Grocers, and to be 
married." As Lambert did not hold 
Luther s opinion on the Eucharist, 
owing probably to his Lollard train 
ing under Bilney, Barnes, another 
heretic, delated him to Cranmer, who 
was compelled to investigate the 
charge, and being himself more 
Lutheran than Zuiuglian at the time, 
he condemned Lambert, and Lam 
bert appealed from the inferior judge 
to the supreme judge, Henry VIII. 
The king accordingly, as supreme 
head of the Church of England, held 
a court, and after trial, ordered 
Cromwell to pronounce the usual 
sentence upon Lambert as a heretic. 
* Stow, p. 577. "The 8th of 
July Griffith Clarke, vicar of 
Wandsworth, with his chaplains and 
his servant, and friar Maire, were all 
four hanged and quartered at St. 
Thomas Watering s : whose indite- 
ment I have not heard of, and there 
fore not able to set down the cause 
of their execution. 7 



[BOOK i. 

and Onion, obtained the crown of martyrdom for their 
denial of the king s supremacy. 1 

But lest men should imagine that the storm was 
directed only against those who were living on earth, 
and that the king dared not attack the saints in heaven, 
St. Thomas Beckett, archbishop of Canterbury, who for 
three hundred years had been numbered with the saints, 
and renowned for innumerable miracles, was compelled 
to defend himself on earth again after so many genera 
tions, and was found guilty of treason. The king there 
upon forbade him to be regarded as a saint. Moreover, 
he made a decree in the council, 2 that any one who should 
either keep his feast, or mention him in his prayers, or 
call him a saint at all, or should suffer his name to 
remain in the calendar, should be treated as a capital 
offender. 3 

The offence for which the most holy martyr was thus 
severely punished was nothing else but the wealth 
lavished upon his tomb, and the necessity of finding 

1 Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 143. "Such 2 Proclamation (see next note) : 

as would voluntarily give over were " The king s majesty, by the advice 

rewarded with large annual pensions, of his council, hath thought expedi- 

and with other pleasures. Against entto declare/ that "Thomas Bee- 
some other there were found quar 
rels, as against Hugh Faringdon, 

ket shall not be ... called a saint." 
3 The sentence may be seen in 

abbot of Heading,, which Avas there the Concilia of Wilkins, iii. 836. 
hanged, drawn, and quartered. It is also referred to in the Bull, 
Against Richard Whiting, abbot of " Cum Redemptor noster," of Paul 
Glastonbury, that was hanged on 
the Torr hill, beside his monastery. 

Against John Beche, abbot of Col- 

III., dated Dec. 17, 1538. See also 
the proclamation of Nov. 16 in 
Burnet s Records, vi. 220-222, ed. 

Chester, put also to death, which Pocock : " His images and pictures 
dreadful sight and hearing made through the whole realm shall be 
some other so sore afraid that they put down and avoided out of all 
were soon entreated to yield over all churches, chapels, and other places ; 
to the king s hands, and some thought and that from henceforth the days 
they escaped fair when they escaped used to be festival in his name, 

shall not be observed, nor the ser 
vice office, antiphones, collects, and 
prayers in his name read, but rased 

with their lives. So that after a 
few years there needed no Parlia 
ment at all for the great abbeys 
they came in otherwise so thick and 

and put out of all the books, . . 

so roundly but only to confirm upon pain of his majesty s indigna- 
such as had been already relin- tion and imprisonment at his grace s 
quished and yielded up to the king." pleasure." 


some excuse for the pillage. The king s receiver con 
fessed that the gold and silver and precious stones and 
sacred vestments taken away from the shrine filled six- 
and-twenty carts. We may judge from this how great 
must have been the wealth of which the king robbed the 
other shrines, churches, and monasteries. When the 
blessed martyr of God, in whose honour so many- 
churches have been built, was thus dishonoured, the 
inhabitants of a parish in Ireland, hearing that the 
patron saint of their church was blotted out of the 
calendar, asked their bishop to tell them which of the 
saints they were to take for their patron. The bishop 
told them to take either St. Peter or St. Paul, or any 
other, in the place of St. Thomas. " But," asked one of 
them, "what if the king should drive him too out of 
heaven ? " When another said, " Then let us dedicate 
our church to the Most Holy Trinity, for if any one can 
keep his place, it is the Most Holy Trinity ; " and so 
they did. 

In pursuance of an agreement entered into with the 
princes of Germany, Henry married Anne, sister of the 
duke of Cleves. The princess thought that everything 
would be safe if the king promised to make her his wife. 
They did not also ask him to promise not to send her 
away. 1 He did marry her, or rather deceived her, for 

1 Rich. Hilles to Bullinger, Lon- very diminutive stature, whom he 
don, 1541. Original Letters, No. now has. It is a certain fact that 
105. " Before the feast of John the about the same time many citizens 
Baptist it began to be whispered of London saw the king very fre- 
about that the king intended to quently in the daytime, and some- 
divorce his queen, Anne, the sister times at midnight, pass over to her 
of the duke of Gelderland, though on the river Thames in a little boat, 
he had married her publicly with The bishop of Winchester also very 
great pomp in the face of the often provided feastings and enter- 
Church on the feast of Epiphany tainments for them in his palace ; 
after last Christmas. This was first but the citizens regarded all this not 
of all whispered by the courtiers, as a sign of divorcing the queen, but 
who observed the king to be much of adultery." 
taken with another young lady of 



[BOOK i. 

immediately afterwards lie got rid of her by act of Par 
liament, 1 and put Catherine Howard in her place. 2 

But as the question of marriage was a source of much 
vexation to the king, it seemed desirable to settle it ; 
accordingly it pleased this most chaste and watchful 
pastor of the Church to declare by a perpetual law the 
conditions for the future of a lawful marriage. After 
long debates in Parliament, a law was made, 3 to which 
all orders in the state consented, and which received the 
definite sanction of the supreme head, to this effect : If 
any two persons, whose marriage shall not be unlawful 
according to the law in the Book of Leviticus, shall give 
their consent to a marriage there and then, and shall 
then separate, and if afterwards either or both of them 
shall be married to any other person, and live together 
as married persons, that second marriage shall annul the 
first, and shall be held good against it, and no one shall 
be allowed to plead in any court in favour of the first 
marriage against the second. 4 

O o 

Now the ancient rule of the law of nations was that 

1 The clergy in convocation, headed 
by Craiimer, first pronounced the 
marriage null, on the ground that 
the king had never given his inward 
consent when he publicly made her 
his wife (Wilkins, Concilia, iii. 854) ; 
and Parliament sanctioned the whole 
process by a bill introduced July 1 2, 
1540. Burnet, i. 450, ed. Pocock. 

2 Lord Herbert, p. 527. "And 
now the Lady Anne of Cleves, con 
tenting herself with the style of the 
king s adopted sister, the Lady Ka- 
therine Howard, daughter to Ed- 
mond, the third son of Thomas, first 
duke of Norfolk, and brother to the 
present duke, was married to the 
king, and presently after showed 
publicly as queen, August 8." 

3 32 Henry VIII. c. 38. 

4 Of these proceedings of the king, 
Richard Hilles, ut supra, says : "And 

yet what is pretended shortly after 
the preamble, that the commonalty 
of the realm have had many doubts 
and perplexities respecting that mar 
riage, is altogether false. For not a 
man would have dared to open his 
mouth to mention such doubts and 
perplexities, even if they had ex 
isted, which is not the case. What 
a termination will the godly expect 
to this bill, which is thus founded on 
falsehood ! It is false, too, what the 
statute declares, that the nobility 
and members of Parliament peti 
tioned the king to refer the whole 
matter concerning this marriage to 
the consideration of his clergy ; 
whereas it is certain that no noble 
man or citizen would have dared 
to utter a single word about that 
business, either openly or in secret, 
until they had perceived that the 


marriage was founded on consent. At this time the 


rule of a schismatic king began to take effect, that 
living together constituted a valid marriage. But the 
Protestants themselves were so ashamed of the law that 
on the death of Henry VIII. they repealed it. 1 

Sampson, 2 bishop of Chichester, and Dr. "Wilson 3 were 
in the month of May [1540], because they had succoured 
certain persons who found fault with the ecclesiastical 
supremacy of the king, sent to prison. For the same 
cause Eichard Farmer, a very wealthy merchant, was 

king s affections were alienated from 
the lady Anne to that young girl 
Catherine, the cousin of the duke of 
Norfolk, whom he married imme 
diately upon Anne s divorce." 

1 i & sEdw.VI. c. 23. " This act" 
of Henry VIII., says Burnet (i. 452, 
ed. Pocock), " gave great occasion of 
censuring the king s former proceed 
ings against queen Anne Boleyn, 
since that which was now condemned 
had been the pretence for dissolving 
his marriage with her." This was 
repealed in the next reign, 2 & 3 
Edw. VI. c. 23 ; and the following 
reason is given in the preamble : 
"Sithence the time of which act 
[32 Henry VIII. c. 38], although the 
same was godly meant, the unruli- 
ness of men hath ungodly abused the 
same, and divers inconveniences 
intolerable in manner to Christian 
ears and eyes followed thereupon 
women and men breaking their own 
promises and faiths made by the one 
unto the other, so set upon sensu 
ality and pleasure, that if, after the 
contract of matrimony, they might 
have whom they more favoured and 
desired, they could be content by 
lightness of their nature to over 
turn all that they had done afore, 
and not afraid in manner, even from 
the very church door and marriage 
feast, the man to take another spouse, 
and the woman to take another hus 

2 Richard Sampson, a doctor of 
laws, of Trinity Hall, Cambridge ; 

Wolsey s commissary in Tournai, 
A.D. 1514; archdeacon of Cornwall, 
1517 ; dean of Windsor, 1523 ; pre 
bendary of Lincoln, 1527 ; arch 
deacon of Suffolk, 1528; dean of 
Liclineld, 1532; treasurer of Salis 
bury, 1535. He was the dean of 
the Chapel Royal who defended the 
divorce and denied the jurisdiction 
of the Pope. The king gave him 
the see of Chichester in June 1536, 
and the bishop of London confirmed 
his election to the deanery of St. 
Paul s July 27 of the same year. 
His defence of the royal supremacy, 
printed by Berthelet, may be seen 
in Strype, Mem., i. ii. p. 162 ; and 
in Brown, Fasciculus, ii. 820. The 
king took the deanery from him in 
May 1540, when he sent him to 
prison, but not the bishopric. He 
was restored to the royal favour 
afterwards, and made bishop of 
Lichfield in 1543, in succession to 
Rowland Lee, who married Henry 
and Anne Boleyn. He died at 
Eccleshall, Sept. 25, 1554, having 
renounced his heresies on the acces 
sion of queen Mary. 

3 Nicholas Wilson, D.D., born in 
Yorkshire, and educated in Cam 
bridge. He refused to take the 
oath of the succession, and was sent 
to the Tower with the bishop of 
Rochester and Sir Thomas More. 
Unhappily he fell away, took the 
oath, and in 1542 was collated to 
the prebend of Hoxton in St. Paul s, 
and died June 8, 1548. 





deprived of all lie had. 1 That was done, as every 
body knew, by the advice of Cromwell, to whom, as a 
second Wolsey, the direction of all affairs of state had 
been now intrusted. 

Sir John Neville was a Catholic, and beloved by his 
countrymen ; but Cromwell hated him because he kept 
the faith, and because he was in favour with the people. 
So he denounced him to the king as a suspected person. 
Then when Sir John was playing at dice with the king, 
Cromwell invited him to supper ; the matter had been 
previously arranged between Cromwell and the king. 
From the supper- table Sir John Neville was, by Crom 
well s orders, carried away to prison, and from prison to 
the block. 

Moreover, he laid a snare also for Lord Dacres of the 
north, 2 a great nobleman, and a good Catholic. But 
because, on the day of the trial, Cromwell could not be 

1 Hall, 838. " In this month was 
sent to the Tower Dr. Wilson and 
Dr. Sampson, bishop of Chichester, 
for relieving of certain traitorous 
persons which denied the king s 
supremacy ; and for the same offence 
was one Kichard Farmer, grocer, of 
London, a rich and wealthy man, 
and of good estimation in the city, 
committed to the Marshalsea, and 
after in Westminster Hall was ar 
raigned and attainted in the prae- 
munire, and lost all his goods." 
Burnet (i. 567, ed. Pocock) says 
that Sampson and Wilson he does 
not speak at all of Richard Farmer 
were put in the Tower upon sus 
picion of corresponding with the 
Pope. But he retracts this indirectly 
in another place (vol. iii. p. 265), 
where he gives the substance of a 
letter of Richard Hilles. That 
writer (Epist. Tigurinse, p. 140 ; 
Original Letters, No. 105) says : 
" The bishop of Chichester, and 
Dr. Wilson, a Papist like Eckins, 
were set at liberty by the king, 

though they had been shut out from 
the general pardon. The treason 
they had committed, as I hear, was 
sending alms to that Papist Abel, 
then brought down to the lowest 
misery through his long detention in 
a most filthy prison, and, as the Pa 
pists say, almost eaten up by worms, 
vermibus fere necatns" Stow (p. 580) 
says that Richard Farmer s wife and 
children were " thrust out of doors. 
Also the keeper of Newgate was 
sent to the Marshalsea for giving 
liberty to Dr. Powell and Dr. Abel, 
his prisoners, to go under bail." 

2 Hall, 815. "The ninth day of 
July [1534] was the Lord Dacres of 
the north arraigned at Westminster 
of high treason, when the duke of 
Norfolk sat as judge. ... He was 
found that day by his peers not 
guilty. . . . At those words, not 
guilty, there was the greatest shout 
and cry of joy, that the like no man 
living may remember that ever he 


present, being kept at home by the gout, Lord Dacres 
being innocent, was easily acquitted. 1 Though he knew 
how much he was hated by Cromwell, nevertheless, 
thinking it not amiss to yield to the times, he called 
upon him, and thanked him, as if the justice of his 
cause had been sustained by the goodwill of Cromwell. 
" Thank my legs," was the answer of Cromwell ; " you 
should have had your deserts, if they had not kept me 
at home." The rude and savage man could not even 
dissemble his cruel temper. 

The man, determined that his prey should not escape 
his clutches again, advised the king to make it law that 
a man condemned for high treason, absent and without 
a trial, should be regarded as no less justly convicted 
than a man tried and convicted by a jury of twelve 
men, which is the custom in England. 2 But before we 
go further, let us consider the justice of God, who 
turned this evil counsel to the ruin of its author. 

1 Baga de Secretis, bundle 6, 
Third Report of the Deputy Keeper, 
p. 234. The charge against him was 
" treasonable communication and 
alliances with the Scots," and he 
was tried by the Peers, the duke 
of Norfolk being lord high steward, 
July 9, 1534, and found not guilty. 

2 Foxe, v. p. 402. "Whereupon 
divers of the nobles conspiring 
against him [Cromwell], some for 
hatred, and some for religion s sake, 
he was cast into the Tower of 
London ; where, as it happened 
as it were by a certain fatal destiny 
that whereas he, a little before, 
had made a law, that whosoever was 

cast into the Tower, should be pat 
to death, without examination, he 
himself suffered by the same law. 
It is said, which also I do easily 
credit, that he made this violent 
law, not so much for any cruelty 
or tyranny, as only for a certain 
secret purpose, to have entangled 
the bishop of Winchester, who albeit 
he was, without doubt, the most 
violent adversary of Christ and His 
religion, notwithstanding, God, per- 
adventure, would not have His 
religion set forth by any wicked 
cruelty or otherwise than was meet 
and convenient." 






WHEN the duke of Saxony and the landgrave of Hesse, 
about to take up arms with some of the princes of Ger 
many against the emperor, had formed the Smalcaldic 
league, they asked the king of England to become a 
member of it ; but the emperor, having discovered their 
plans, prevailed upon the king to give them no coun 
tenance or support. Henry promised to do all the 
emperor asked of him. Moreover, when the princes of 
Germany applied to the king a second time to renew 
that league, he refused, because he would not break 
the promise made to the emperor. Cromwell, however, 
because of his adoption of their heresies, being wholly 
in favour of the Germans, knowing, too, that the king 
was afraid of the emperor, and would be glad if the latter 
could be embarrassed by a w^ar, signed the treaty in the 
king s name without consulting the king, thinking that 
the king refused to do so, not from want of goodwill 
to the Germans, but from want of courage to show it. 

The emperor complained to the king, who denied 
that his name had been subscribed to the league, and 
then the emperor sent him a copy of the treaty so signed. 
The king, when he saw it, was very angry with Crom- 



well, and resolved upon his death ; * but as he did not 
like to displease the German princes, he laid other 
offences to his charge. Hence it was that in the mar 
vellous justice of God, the first person who suffered 
according to the law which Cromwell had suggested, 2 
was Cromwell himself. He was condemned in his 
absence and unheard, being found guilty of heresy and 
treason July 9, and beheaded the 2Oth day after 3 [July 
28, 1540]. Nevertheless, the persecution of the Catholics 
came not to an end. 

For on the 3Oth day of July six persons were put to 
death, three of whom were Catholics and three were 
heretics. They were carried to the place of execution 
through the streets upon hurdles, two and two together, 
a Catholic and a heretic upon the same hurdle. The 
cruelty of that procedure seemed to be worse than death. 4 

1 Stow, p. 578. " The king from 
this time unto the day of her divorce 
[Anne of Cleves] was in a manner 
weary of his life, through his settled 
mislike he took of her, and his fierce 
wrath was kindled against all those 
that were preferrers of this match, 
whereof the Lord Cromwell was the 
chief ; for the which, and for dealing 
somewhat too far in some matters 
"beyond the king s good liking, were 
the occasions of the Lord Cromwell s 
hasty death." 

2 See note at the end of chapter 

3 Richard Hilles in a letter to 
Bui linger (Zurich Letters, Let. 105): 
" Not long before the death of Crom 
well, the king advanced him, and 
granted him large houses and riches, 
and more public offices, together 
with very extensive and lucrative 
domains ; and in the same way he 
also endowed queen Anne a short 
time before he beheaded her. But 
some persons now suspect that this 
was all an artifice, to make people con 
clude that he must have been a most 
wicked traitor. . . It was from a 

like artifice, as some think, that the 
king conferred upon Cromwell s son 
Gregory, who was almost a fool, his 
father s title and many of his do 
mains, while he was yet living in 
prison, that he might more readily 
confess his offences against the king 
at the time of execution. . . . There 
are, moreover, other parties who 
assert, with what truth God knows, 
that Cromwell was threatened to be 
burned at the stake, and not to die 
by the axe, unless at the time of 
execution he would acknowledge his 
crimes against the king, and that he 
then said, I am altogether a miser 
able sinner. " 

4 Burnet (Hist. Reform., i. 474, ed. 
Pocock) says that the three Catholic 
priests "demeaned themselves to 
wards" the three heretic priests "with 
the most uncharitable and spiteful 
malice that was possible so that 
their own historian says that their 
being carried with them to their 
execution was bitterer to them than 
death itself." Burnet does not say 
how he came to know of the " most 
uncharitable and spiteful malice " of 


The Catholics were Thomas Abel, Edward Powell, 
and Eichard Fetherston, 1 all theologians, who having 
formerly defended queen Catherine in the matter of the 
divorce, and now refusing to acknowledge the ecclesi 
astical supremacy of Henry, obtained the glorious crown 
of martyrdom. The three heretics were Eobert Barnes, 2 
Thomas Gerard, 3 and William Jerome, 4 priests, who 
because they held the heresy of Zuinglius were by order 
of the king burnt in Smithfield. 5 

the three priests, of which even Foxe 
makes no mention. He is also un 
just to Sander, who does not say 
that the priests felt the cruelty of 
being in such company, more than 
the three heretics felt the cruelty of 
being on the same hurdle with the 
Catholics. Foxe, however (v. 420), 
makes an observation which deserves 
to be remembered for its folly, if not 
for its malignity : " This was Win 
chester s device, to colour his own tyr 
anny, and to make the people doubt 
ful what faith they should trust to." 
1 Richard Hilles, writing to Bui- 
linger, from London (Original 
Letters, No. 105), says: "Soon after 
the dissolution of Parliament, 
namely, on the 3oth of July last 
year, were executed six of those men 
who had been exempted from the 
general pardon. Three of them 
were Popish priests, whose names 
were Abel, Powell, and Fetherston, 
and who refused to acknowledge the 
king s new title and his authority 
over the clergy. They were dealt 
with in the usual manner, first hung, 
then cut down from the gallows 
while yet alive, then drawn, be 
headed, and quartered, and their 
limbs fixed over the gates of the 
city ; but the heads in general of 
as many priests or monks as are 
executed in this city are fixed on the 
top of a long pole, and placed upon 
London Bridge as a terror to others." 
2 Robert Barnes, born near Lymne 
in Norfolk, entered the Augustinian 
Order in Cambridge; but he fell into 

heresy early, was tried and im 
prisoned, but escaped after recanting 
in 1526, and on the Continent be 
coming acquainted with Luther and 
others of the same kind, he became 
more and more obstinate. Notwith 
standing the notoriety of his heresies, 
Henry VIII. employed him, till he 
grew weary of him, and had him 
burnt at Smithfield. 

3 Thomas Gerard or Garret was 
active in circulating the writings of 
Luther ; once curate of All Hallows, 
Honey Lane. 

1 William Jerome was vicar of 

5 Original Letters, No. 105. "I 
could never ascertain," writes Hilles, 
" why these three gospellers were 
excepted from the general pardon 
so that I can conjecture none more 
likely than that the king, desiring 
to gratify the clergy and the igno 
rant rude mob, together with the 
obstinate part of his nobility and 
citizens, appointed these "three 
victims, as he probably considered 
them, as it were for a holocaust to 
appease those parties, or to acquire 
fresh popularity with them. ... In 
the week following the burning of 
these preachers, were executed many 
others of those who had been ex 
cepted from the general pardon. 
The reason of their execution is un 
known to me; but it \vas reported 
to have been for treason against the 
king. ... It is now no novelty 
among us to see men slain, hung, 
quartered, or beheaded : some for 


On the 4th day of August the prior of Doncaster, three 
monks, and a layman surnamed Philpott, were driven 
out of this world, and received into the heavenly glory 
of the Everlasting King, because they would not swear 
to the ecclesiastical supremacy of an earthly king. 1 In 
the same year, May 28th, at the bidding of the tyrant, 
Margaret countess of Salisbury underwent a blessed 
death. 2 She was the mother of Cardinal Pole, and 
sprung from the house of York, for her father was 
George, brother of Edward IV. The only charge brought 
against her was that she, being the mother of such a son, 
had received letters of filial duty from him without the 
knowledge of the king, and that she wore on her breast 
a picture of the Eive Wounds of our Lord, which the 
king considered to be a sign of her affection for the men 
of Yorkshire, who under that standard had taken up 
arms in defence of the Christian faith. But the truth is, 
that being unable to lay his hands upon the son, 3 whom 

trifling expressions which were ex 
plained or interpreted as having been 
spoken against the king ; others for 
the Pope s supremacy ; some for one 
thing, and some for another." 

1 Stow, p. 581. "4th of August 
[1540] were drawn to Tyborne six 
persons, and one led betwixt twain, 
to wit, Lawrence Cook, prior of 
Doncaster, William Home, a lay 
brother of the Charterhouse of 
London, Giles Home, gentleman, 
Clement Philip, gentleman of Calais, 
and servant to the Lord Lisle, Edmund 
Broinholme, priest, chaplain to the 
*said Lord Lisle,Darby Gening,Robert 
Bird, all hanged and quartered, and 
had been attainted by Parliament, 
for denial of the king s supremacy." 

2 Stow, p. 581. "The 2;th of 
May [1541] Margaret countess of 
Salisbury, sometime daughter and 
heir to George duke of Clarence, wife 
to Sir Richard Poole, knight, and 
mother to Cardinal Poole/ was be 

headed in the Tower of London, 
being never arraigned nor tried 
before, but condemned by act of 

3 Cardinal Pole, in a letter to 
Cromwell, May 2, 1537, says that the 
king had asked the king of Prance 
to deliver him up to Henry (Burnet, 
Hist; Reform., vi. 186, ed. Pocock): 
"I was more ashamed to hear, for 
the compassion I had to the king s 
honour, than moved by any indig 
nation, that I coming not only as 
ambassador, but as Legate in the 
highest sort of embassage that is 
used among Christian princes, a 
prince of honour should desire of 
another prince of like honour, 
Betray thine ambassador, betray 
the Legate, and give him to my 
ambassador s hands to be brought 
unto me/ This was the dishonour 
able request, as I understand, of the 
king." The letter is also to be found 
in Strype, Mem., i. ii. 326. 



[BOOK i. 

lie so earnestly desired to punish because he had written 
a book in defence of the unity of the Church, 1 he sacri 
ficed the mother in his place. 2 

In the year of our Lord 1541 the imperial Diet was 
held in Katisbon, and thereto the king, weary, after the 
manner of the world, not only of the wickedness of 
others, but also of his own, sent Sir Henry Knyvett and 
Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, a man of great 
learning and marvellous sagacity. One of his reasons 
for sending them was his desire to justify his caution in 
matters of religion before certain princes of Germany, 
who were charging him with being lukewarm in his pro 
secution of the new gospel. But his chief reason was 
this : 3 He knew that if neither Catholics nor Protestants 

1 Pro Ecclesiastica Unitatis De- 
fensione, lib. iv. The book was 
printed probably A.D. 1536, and was 
sent to the king immediately after 
the execution of Anne Boleyn, but 
not published then. Latimer, writ 
ing to Cromwell, Dec. 13, 1538 
(Remains, p. 411, Parker Soc. ed.), 
says of this book : " God prosper 
you to the uttering of all hollow 
hearts ! Blessed be the God of Eng 
land, that worketh all, whose instru 
ment you be ! I heard you say 
once, after you had seen that furious 
invective of Cardinal Pole, that you 
would make him to eat his own 
heart, which you have now, I trow, 
brought to pass ; for he must now 
eat his own heart, and be as heart 
less as he is graceless." Cranmer, 
also, in his answer to the " Devon 
shire .Rebels," says, " Surely I have 
read a book of his making, which 
whosoever shall read, . . . he will 
judge Cardinal Pole neither worthy 
to dwell in this realm, nor yet to 

2 Lord Herbert (Life of Henry 
VIII., p. 532) says: "The old lady 
being brought to the scaffold, set up 
in the Tower, was commanded to lay 
her head on the block ; but she, as a 

person of great quality assured me, 
refused, saying, So should traitors 
do, and I am none. Neither did it 
serve that the executioner told her 
it was the fashion; so turning her 
grey head every way, she bid him, if 
he would have her head, to get it as 
he could." She had been attainted 
in 1 539, then kept in prison, and put 
to death May 27, 1541. 

3 Burnet (Hist. .Reform., iv. 578, 
ed. Pocock) says that " this is 
another ornament of the fable, to 
show the poet s wit ; but it is as 
void of truth as any passage inPlautus 
or Terence is. For the king was all 
his life so intractable in that point, 
that the Popish party had no other 
way to maintain their interest with 
him but to comply, not without 
affectation in that matter." Sander 
had better opportunities of learning 
the truth on this point both in Rome 
and in Spain, and Gardiner confesses 
it (Foxe, vi. 578) : " Master Knevett 
and I were sent ambassadors unto- 
the emperor to desire him that he 
would be a mean between the 
Pope s Holiness and the king, to> 
bring the king to the obedience 
of the See of Rome." 


were satisfied with, him, seeing that he fully agreed 
with neither, he therefore determined that his ambassa 
dors should, in concert with the emperor, devise some 
means by which he might be reconciled to the Eoman 
Pontiff, and openly observe the perfect rule of the 
Catholic faith, which he knew to be more true and more 
certain than any other. He was driven to this by the 
pressure of his conscience, which, as the ancients have 
justly observed, is equal to a thousand witnesses. 1 

But as the king wished to save his royal honour, that 
is, he wished to return to Catholic unity without making 
a public confession of sins so notorious, without doing a 
single act of penance, and without making restitution of 
the property of the Church, his good intentions came to 
nothing, for he loved the praise of men rather than the 
honour of God. Such a reconciliation would have been 
at variance with the canons, and would not have pro 
moted his everlasting salvation. 

But as the king himself was faithful neither to God 
nor to his first wife, so also his wives were not faithful 
to him. Catherine Howard, who had not been his wife 
yet two years, was found guilty of adultery, 2 and with 

1 The duke of Norfolk was exa- Chester should have said he could 

mined on this point when he was devise a way how the king s majesty 

put in the Tower. His answer may might have all things upright with 

be seen in Burnet s Hist. Reform., the said bishop of Rome, and his 

vi. 274, ed. Pocock. " Also my said highness honour saved. Such -\vere 

lord and Mr. Secretary asked me the words, or much like." 

whether I was ever made privy to a a Stow, p. 583. "The I2th of 

letter sent from my lord of Wyn- February [1542] the Lady Howard, 

Chester and Sir Henry Knevet of any otherwise called queen Katherine, 

overture made by Grandvile to them, and the Lady Jane Rochford for be- 

for a way to be taken between his ing of her counsel with Thomas 

majesty and the bishop of Rome, and Culpepper, were both beheaded with- 

that the said letters should have come in the Tower of London." Of Lady 

to his majesty to Dover, I being there Rochford the following story is told 

with him. Whereunto this is my of her in " Prevarication of the Holy 

true answer : I was never at Dover Church s Liberties," bk. i. ch. ii. s. 

with his highness sith my lord of 10 : "There is a domestic tradition 

Richmond died. . . . It was spoken in the honourable family of the Lord 

in the council that my lord of Wyn- Morley to this effect, viz., that the 



[BOOK i. 

her companions in sin, Thomas Culpepper and Francis 
Derham, 1 was put to death. 

As these men were said to have sinned with Catherine 
Howard both before and after her royal wedlock, so a 
law is made for the prevention of the like scandal in 
future times, to this effect, that any woman the king 
might marry, believing her to be a maid, should suffer 
the penalties due to high treason, if being otherwise, she 
did not reveal her iniquity to the king. 2 However, to 
escape from the chances of deceit, the king took for his 
sixth wife Catherine Parr, the widow of Lord Latimer, 
and therefore married before. Catherine Parr was in one 
respect fortunate ; the king died before he had time, as 
it was said he intended, to put her for heresy to death. 

lady Vicomitess Rochford, daughter 
of Henry Lord Morley, surnamed 
God s Cross, a learned, wise, and re 
ligious nobleman, had utterly with 
drawn herself from the court and 
the company of the pretended queen 
Anne, witli a resolution not to re 
turn, which purpose was diverted 
by earnest letters from the said 
Anne whose brother the Lord Koch- 
ford was the same lady s husband 
whereupon one night she was loudly 
called upon in her sleep as she lay 
in her father s house, Hallingbury 
Morley, in Essex, where her cham 
ber beareth the name Rochford to this 
day by a voice which so distinctly 
spoke these words, Return not to 
court/ as that she awaked therewith, 
and looking aside, beheld, to her 
seeming, her own head cut off, and 
held up to her between one s hands, 
which affrighted her into a confirma 
tion of her former resolution, which 
for her life and safety was so neces 
sary ; but overcome in the end by 
the said queen s restless importuni 
ties, she neglected all warnings, and 
went, though pensively, and with a 
kind of foreboding fearfulness, but 
perished with the queen." 

1 Baga de Secretis, pouch 13, 

bundle i. Indictments were found 
against Culpepper and Derham in 
the counties of York and Middlesex, 
in the county and city of Lincoln, 
in Surrey and in Kent. They were 
tried at the Guildhall, London, 
where they first pleaded not guilty, 
then pleaded guilty before the jury 
retired, Dec. i, 1541. They were 
put to death, according to Stow (p. 
583), " at Tyborne the loth day of 
December; Culpepper was beheaded, 
. . . Derham was quartered." 

2 33 Henry VIII. c. 21. Richard 
Hilles, writing to Bullinger, Sept. 
26, 1543 (Original Letters,! 11), says : 
"Our king has within these two 
months, as I wrote to John Burcher, 
burnt three godly men in one clay. 
For in the month of July he mar 
ried the widow of a certain noble 
man of the name of Latimer, and he 
is always wont to celebrate his nup 
tials by some wickedness of this 
kind." The king married Catherine 
Parr at Hampton Court, June 12, 
1 543. She outlived the king, mar 
ried the brother of the Protector in 
the next reign, and died in childbed 
shortly before the execution of her 


Early in March, Jermyn Gardiner, secretary of the 
bishop of Winchester, and Larke, rector of Chelsea, John 
Ireland, a priest, and a chaplain of Sir Thomas More, 
and soon afterwards Ashby, suffered martyrdom because 
they would not acknowledge the royal supremacy. 1 

The silver coin, hitherto most pure in England, was 
for the first time turned into brass by the king 2 a 
manifest judgment of God for the rapine and the sacri 
lege committed by him. The wealth taken from the 
monasteries was so great that even the tenth part thereof 
might have satisfied the greed of the most covetous 
king ; all these treasures, the crucifixes of silver and 
gold, all the sacred vessels, the decorations of the altars, 
all the furniture of nearly a thousand monasteries, 3 their 
estates, farms, rents, dues, and rights, were seized by 
the king. Then, again, he had the tenths and first-fruits 
of every benefice in England; and the money brought 
in by the sale even of the lead, timber, and stones of the 

1 The Prevarication, etc., cli. iv. 
s. 12. "Likewise after the king s 
marriage with his sixth wife, the 
Lady Catherine Parr, late widow to 
the Lord Latimer, the said persecu 
tion raged upon German Gardiner, 
gent., John Larke, parson of Chel- 
sey, John Ireland, priest, William 
Ashby, James Singleton, John Ris- 
by, and Thomas Rich, for they were 
all hanged, bo welled, and quartered 
for denial of the king s supremacy 
ecclesiastical. But when the king 
began to be weary of his sixth wife 
also, and knew not how to be rid of 
her, unless he should cause her to 
be burnt for heresy, she being a Lu 
theran, he began to conceive w T ith 
himself that he could not in honour 
proceed against her as an heretic, 
unless also he dealt more mildly with 
the Catholics, and thereupon the 
persecution seemed to stint, for he 
really intended for the cause afore 
said to have taken away her life 

also, had not his own death pre 
vented it." They were martyred in 
A.D. 1543. 

2 Stow, p. 587. " In the mean 
space, to wit, on the i6th of May 
[A.D. 1 544], proclamation was made 
for the enhaunsing of gold to 48 sh. 
and silver to 4 sh. the ounce. Also 
the king caused to be coined base 
monies in great abundance, which 
was since that time, to wit, in the 
fifth year of king Edward VI., called 
down from 12 pence to nine pence, 
and from 9 pence to 6 pence ; and 
in the second year of queen Eliza 
beth called into her majesty s mints 
and there refined." 

3 Spelman, History and Fate of 
Sacrilege, p. 186. " The axe and the 
mattock ruined almost all the chief 
and most magnificent ornaments of 
the kingdom, viz., 376 of the lesser 
monasteries, 645 of the greater sort, 
90 colleges, no religious hospitals, 
2374 chantries and free chapels." 



[BOOK i. 

monasteries. With all this he should have left his sub 
jects free for ever from all taxes ; indeed he said he 
should do so, but it was to make the people assent the 
more readily to the ruin of the monasteries. He ought 
therefore to have surpassed every prince in Christendom 
in his wealth of silver and of gold ; but it was not so, 
for by the just judgment of God it was far otherwise 
with him, for within a few years after the plunder of 
the monasteries he was a far poorer man than either he 
himself or his ancestors had ever been before. 1 Yea, he 
alone laid heavier taxes upon the people than all the 
kings together had done during the five hundred years 
that were past. 2 

1 Harpsfield, bk. iii. pp. 119, 120, 
Eyston MS. " The revenues, goods, 
and moveables of the said abbeys, 
with the said hospitals, with the 
great treasure that was made of the 
timber, bells, and leads, and the or 
naments of the Church, and other 
furniture of the said houses, were so 
great that the commodity thereof 
seemed able and sufficient to have 
defended and maintained the realm 
against all outward and inward ene 
mies many kings days. And yet 
was the king within few years 
brought to great need and debt, and 
borrowed great sums of the mer 
chants beyond the seas upon interest, 
whereof some part is yet unpaid, 
and the queen [Mary] that now is, 
is fain to take orders for it. Yea, 
beside the said monasteries, he levied 
within 14 or 15 years, and laid such 
exactions upon the people, of sub 
sidies, contributions, and benevo 
lences, when they gave it with an 
evil will, beside many loans, and 
beside the immeasurable abasing of 
the coin to his inestimable advan 

2 Kichard Hilles (Original Letters, 
No. 105), writing to Bullinger in 
1 540, says : " By tiie authority, too, 
of the same Parliament, the king 
has imposed many burdens on his 

subjects. For there was granted 
him a fifth of all the yearly revenues 
of the bishops and the benefices of 
the clergy, in addition to the tenths, 
which he annually receives from 
them. From the laity, as well the 
nobility as citizens and peasantry, 
there was granted him the tenth of 
all their yearly income, patrimony, 
and lands ; and from those who 
have not any patrimony or yearly 
revenue there was granted the king 
a twentieth of their moneys, goods, 
cattle, fruit, and all kind of pro 
perty whatever. The north of Eng 
land, however, where the rebellion 
took place immediately after the exe 
cution of queen Anne, was now ex 
cused these payments by the favour 
of the king. Moreover, this busi 
ness was so artfully managed that 
the archbishop of Canterbury and 
the other lords spiritual as these 
carnal persons are called offered 
the king of their own accord the 
payment of this money, in the name 
of all the clergy, because the king 
had delivered them from the yoke 
and bondage of the Roman Pontiff. 
As though they had ever been, when 
subject to the Pope, under such a 
yoke as they now are, when all 
their property and life itself are at 
the king s disposal ! In like man- 



For when the monasteries were still standing, the 
preachers of a false gospel commonly asserted that no 
poor man would be found hereafter in England if the mon 
asteries were once broken up 1 if the treasures hoarded 
by the abbots, and the lands and farms by which a few 
monks were then supported, were divided among a larger 
number of holders. At this time not one of the mon 
asteries is standing, and for every person who then 
begged his bread from door to door there are at least 
twenty now, and they at times can hardly obtain what 
they beg for in such misery. 

The silver coin was then so pure that it had only one- 
eleventh part of alloy to make it the more easily receive 
the impress of the die ; but after that time, by degrees 

ner, too, the laity made the king a 
voluntary grant of this money, which 
they are bound by Parliament to 
pay under a heavy penalty. But 
everything is given freely and vol 
untarily in this country ! " 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. iii. pp. 127, 128, Eyston MS. 
"This prelate," says Harpsfield of 
Cranmer, "when the king went 
about to suppress the monasteries, 
was his chief instrument and worker. 
And to bury the people asleep, and 
to cause them to have better conten- 
tatioii that as it was doubted 
would not patiently and quietly 
bear the suppression, as it proved 
afterwards by the rebellion of Lin 
colnshire and Yorkshire, came and 
preached at Paul s Cross, and to 
sweet the people s ears with pleasant 
words, told them among other things 
that they had no cause to be grieved 
with the eversion of the abbeys, but 
should rather be very glad thereof, 
for the singular benefit that should 
redound to the whole realm thereby. 
And then as he had, and did many 
times afterwards wrongfully per 
suade the people in many matters 
by his lewd lying divinity, so now 
he telleth them by his vain lying 

rhetoric many proper imagined toys, 
and among others, that the king 
should by the suppression of the 
abbeys gather such an infinite trea 
sure, that from that time he should 
have no need, nor would not put 
the people to any manner of pay 
ment or charge for his or the nation s 
affairs. This sermon as no wise 
man did believe, so myself, that 
chanced to be there present, have 
known, and the whole realm beside 
to their smart have felt." 

And further on he thus writes : 
"Yea, I will now add and conclude 
that the only loss of the monasteries 
was not only for the decay of virtue, 
prayer, and religion, but also of the 
politic commonwealth inestimable 
and importable. I say they were the 
very nurseries, not only of piety and 
devotion, but also of the happy 
flourishing of the commonwealth. 
Where were the blind and lame and 
other impotent poor people fed and 
succoured but there ? I have heard 
that there were more such holpen 
in the city of Canterbury in one day 
than be now in all Kent ; more in, 
Winchester in one day than be now 
in all Hampshire, and the like may 
be said of other places." 


and the work was that of the king the coin was so 
debased that two ounces of silver could with difficulty 
be found with eleven ounces of copper or of tin. 

For the better understanding of this matter we must 
keep in mind that Henry VIIL, when he made an expedi 
tion into France, in the thirty-sixth year of his reign, for 
the purpose of laying siege to Boulogne, raised the value 
of his gold and silver coins, whereby an ounce of silver 
was made equivalent to four shillings of English money, 1 
that is, nearly eight Spanish reals. When he had amassed 
as large a treasure as he could by the taxes which he 
laid on the people, by the ordinary revenues of the 
crown, by the duties he levied at the ports, by 
forfeitures and escheats he then issued a new coin 
age much less pure, and though it was not so much 
debased, yet was it of less value by one-fourth than 
the former ; and the next coinage was much more 
debased still than this. In order to get the old coinage 
out of the hands of every one into his own, he promised 
those who would bring it to the mint, to render the new 
coin of greater value than it was commonly held to be. 
He then paid not only his judges, his ministers, soldiers, 
but also every one who sold to him the old coins, in the 
new coinage, which was of less value. By this trick he 
took from every one who had dealings with him in 
money, not one penny in ten, nor one penny in five, 
but one penny in every fourpence by way of tax. And 

1 Lord Herbert, p. 574. " Among away by his crafty neighbours, while 

the king s preparatives for war, that they cried it up in their country. 

of money was the most difficult. For remedy of which inconvenience, 

For though he had much enriched he both enhanced our gold from 

himself with the revenues of the sup- forty-five shillings to forty-eight 

pressed abbeys, and besides, received shillings the ounce ; and silver from 

great subsidies and loans from his three shillings and ninepence to four 

subjects, yet fortifications, shipping, shillings : and together caused cer- 

and other provisions had exhausted tain base moneys newly coined to be 

his treasure. Besides, he found the made current, though not without 

money of his kingdom much drained much murmuring." 



then, when he saw the fraud prosper, he debased the 
coinage more and more till he filled up the measure of 
his days. 

The Holy Ghost has warned us in the Sacred Writ 
ings that they who thus rob others of their goods 1 can 
never be faithful servants of Christ. Christ Himself has 
said, he who is unjust in that which is little, that is, in 
the ordering of the things of this world, is unjust also 
in the greater, that is, in spiritual things. 2 And the 
prophet Isaias cries, "Thy silver is turned into dross : 
thy princes are unfaithful, companions of thieves." 
This fraud of Henry passed on to the sole heirs of the 
schism, as shall be shown further on. 4 

When the king had been nearly two years at war 
with France and Scotland in which Boulogne was 
besieged and surrendered he assembled a Parliament, 
November 24, 1545, by which an act 5 was passed, 
vesting in the king, for the term of his natural life, and 
giving up to his disposition, all hospitals and colleges, 
together with the chantries which the faithful had 
founded for the benefit of their souls. However, he 
disposed of none of them, being hindered by death. 6 

1 Latimer, Sermons, pp. 40, 41, 
ed. Parker Soc. " I remember the 
prophet Isaiah, in what manner of 
wise he reproved the sons of the 
people, saying, . . . Thy silver is 
turned into dross. So no doubt 
the fall of the money hath been 
here in England the undoing of 

2 St. Luke xvi. 10. 

3 Isa. i. 22, 23. 

4 Book ii. chapter v. 

5 37 Henry VIII. c. 4. 

6 Heylyn, Hist. Kef., p. 12. " To 
wards the charges of which wars the 
king obtained a grant in Parliament 
of all chantries, colleges, hospitals, 
and free chapels, with the lands 
thereunto belonging, to be united 
to the crown. But dying before he 
had taken the benefit of it, he left 
that part of the spoil to such of his 
ministers who had the managing of 
affairs in his son s minority. 



WHEN the king saw, as the hour of death was approach 
ing, that in his greed, or rather in his rage, he had 
broken away from the unity of the Church, he consulted 
secretly with some of the bishops how he might be 
reconciled to the Apostolic See, and the rest of Christen 
dom. But behold the severity of God with those who 
knowingly fall into sin, or who lull themselves asleep 
therein ! No man was found courageous enough to advise 
him honestly, to tell him his mind, or to show him the 
truth ; they were all afraid because of his former cruelty. 
They knew that many had been put to death who had 
spoken their minds frankly in past times, either to him 
or to Cromwell, even those who had been commanded 
to speak. So was it now ; one of the bishops, doubting 
whether a snare had been laid for him, replied, the 
king was far wiser than other men ; he had, under the 
divine guidance, renounced the supremacy of the Koman 
Pontiff, and had nothing to be afraid of, now that his 
resolution had been confirmed by the public law of the 

It is said, too, that Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Win 
chester, persuaded him, when alone with him, to call 
his Parliament together, if possible, and to communicate 
to it a matter of that importance ; if the time was too 
short, then to express his resolution in writing, and 


thereby testify to the voice of his conscience, for God 
would be satisfied with the mere desire of his heart, if he 
were in any straits which necessarily hindered the per 
formance of the act. But as soon as the bishop had 
gone, the crowd of flatterers came around him, and 
afraid that the return of the kingdom to the obedience 
of the Holy See would force them to part with the 
ecclesiastical lands, these men persuaded him to allow no 
such scruples to enter his mind. It is very easy for a 
man not rooted and grounded in charity to break a good 
resolution. The king s consultation with his bishops 
concerning the restoration of the kingdom to the unity 
of the Church had no other fruit than to show openly 
that he who, against his conscience, had broken away 
from the Koman Church, and was therefore resisting the 
. known truth, had sinned against the Holy Ghost. 

As to the temper, pursuits, and habits of the king, 
we may say briefly that he was not unversed in learning, 
that he encouraged learned men, and increased the 
salaries of certain professors. With the exception of 
Cranmer, whom he made archbishop of Canterbury, to 
be the minister of his lust in the affair of the divorce, 
the bishops he named were men of learning, and very 
far from being bad men ; many of them afterwards, 
during the reigns of Edward and Elizabeth, suffered 
bonds and imprisonment as confessors of the Catholic 

His reverence for the Sacrament of the Eucharist was 
always most profound. Shortly before he died, when 
about to communicate, as he always did, under one 
kind, he rose up from his chair, and fell on his knees 
to adore the Body of our Lord. The Zuinglians who 
were present said that his majesty, by reason of his 
bodily weakness, might make his communion sitting in 
his chair. The king s answer was, " If I could throw 



myself down, not only on the ground, but under the 
ground, I should not then think that I gave honour 
enough to the most Holy Sacrament." 

He gave up the Catholic faith for no other reason in 
the world than that which came from his lust and 
wickedness. He rejected the authority of the Pope 
because he was not allowed to put away Catherine, 
when he was beaten and overcome as he was by the 
flesh. He destroyed the monasteries, partly because 
the monks, and especially the friars, resisted the divorce ; 
partly because he hungered after the ecclesiastical lands, 
which he seized that he might have more abundant 
means to spend in feasting on women of unclean lives, 
and on the foolish buildings he raised. 1 

His understanding was acute, and his judgment solid, 
whenever he applied himself to the serious discussion of 
any question, especially in the early part of the day. 
After dinner he was often overcome with wine, 2 and the 
courtiers, the flatterers, and the heretics with whom 
Anne Boleyn and others, both wives and concubines, 
had filled the court, observed it, and then never spoke 
to him for the purpose of their own advantage, or for 
that of ruining others, but in the afternoon. Others, 
too, waited for the time when he took physic, for he 
was then more than usually cheerful ; and there were 
those who allowed him to beat them or cheat them at 
dice he was on such occasions demonstrative in his 

1 Strype, Mem., ii. ii. 353. Judge has printed a " Cotemporary Ac- 
Hales, speaking of the impoverish- count of Fisher and More," written 
ing of the people, says : " This thing probably many years before Sander 
also caused the king that dead is to wrote, in which it is said (p. 565) 
make so many castles and bulwarks that the king had become a sot in 
by the seaside as he did. And his his later years : " Ac ferunt eum 
charges by these means and occasions quotidianis fere conviviis et comessa- 
waxing daily greater and greater, he tionibus studiose operam dedisse, ut 
was of necessity driven to ask and multo vino obruta mens a cogita- 
take so great subsidies and taxes of tione tot facinorum et prioris vitae 
his subjects as he did." atque glorise memoria averteretur." 

2 Mr. Pocock (Records, ii. 553) 


joy and then hinting that they were ruined, begged of 
him in return either the goods of some innocent man, or 
the lead of a monastery, or the bells of a church, 1 or 
something of great price of that kind. It is said of one 
that he was not only rewarded, but raised to honours, 
because he gave the king a porkling well dressed, of 
which he was very fond ; of another, because he moved 
the king s chair at the fitting moment away from the 
fire ; and of another, because he behaved himself respect 
fully and pleasantly at dice. 2 

He restored Mary, Catherine s child, to her rank, 
that she might be the next in succession to his son 
Edward, and take precedence of Elizabeth. It is very 
clear from this that he was dishonest in putting away 
his wife, and that he did so under the influence of his 
passion for Anne Boleyn. He appointed, by his last 
will, sixteen persons to be the guardians of his son, 
thereby making the monarchy, as it were, an aristocracy. 
Shortly before he died he ordered Thomas duke of Nor 
folk he was one of those who had treated the Apostolic 
Legates with scant respect, though otherwise a Catholic 3 
to be imprisoned for life, and had the son of the 

1 Greyfriars Chronicle, p. 73. writes (Burnet, vi. 275) : " If I had 
"Sir Myllys Patryge, knyght, the twenty lives, I would rather have 
wych playd with kyng Henry the spent them all against him [the 
VIII. at dysse for the grett belfery Pope] than ever he should have any 
that stode in Powlles Church- power in this realm, for no man 
yarde." knoweth that better than I, by 

2 Stow (Survey, p. 52, ed. 1876) reading of stories, how his usurped 
tells the following story : " A fair power hath increased from time to 
house with divers tenements near time. Nor such time the king s ma- 
adjoining, sometime belonging to a jesty hath found him his enemy, no 
late dissolved priory, since possessed living man hath both with his heart 
by Mistress Cornwallies, widow, and with his tongue, in this realm, 
and her heirs, by gift of Henry in France, and also to many Scottish 
VIII., in reward of fine puddings, gentlemen, spoken more sore against 
as it was commonly said, by her his said usurped power than I have 
made, wherewith she had presented done, as I can prove by good wit- 
him." nesses." 

8 The duke in the Tower thus 


duke, the earl of Surrey, beheaded. 1 This he did, 
deceived by the heretics, who took care that those 
Catholics should be put out of the way, for it was not 
believed that they had committed any offence against 
the king. 

The king having ruined a most admirable constitution 
by unsatiable gluttony, was now grown so unwieldy 
that he could hardly enter by the doors, and was wholly 
unable to mount up the stairs. They lifted him up, 
sitting in a chair, by machinery, to the upper rooms of 
the palace. It was said that he had no blood left in his 
body, that it was corrupted into humours. When he 
was told that he was at the point of death, he called for 
a goblet of white wine, and turning to one of his attend 
ants, said, " All is lost ! " 2 

He reigned thirty-seven years, nine months, and six 
days, nearly twenty years of which he passed in the 
peace of the Church ; the four years that followed were 
spent in strife and doubts, and the last fourteen years in 
open schism. Though three of his children ascended the 
throne in succession, yet not one of them ever raised a 
monument to his memory. Mary, it is true, wished to 
do so, but her piety stood in the way, for she could 
not, being a Catholic, hand on to future generations 
the name of one who went into schism. Edward and 
Elizabeth, too, who approved of Henry s apostasy and 

1 Hilles to Bullinger, Feb. 25, 1547, Parliament or diet, is placed in the 

Original Letters, No. 118. "About hands of sixteen persons, eight of 

one or two weeks before the death whom, it is said, are bishops, until 

of the aforementioned king Henry, the king be grown up." The earl 

he commanded, as some say, by his of Surrey was executed Jan. 19, 1547. 
will, that the duke who in this 2 Prevarication of the Holy 

country is called the duke of Nor- Church s Liberties, ch. iv. s. 31, 

folk, together with his only son, Eyston MS. "In his last sick- 

who in England is called the earl ness always muttering out, Monks 

of Surrey, should both of them be and friars, and desperately conclud- 

beheaded. The government of Eng- ing his life with these his last 

land, which is also confirmed by the words, Bryan, we have lost all ! " 


schism, seem in this matter to have put away from 
themselves every sense of dutiful affection, unless it be 
that all this came to pass by the just judgment of God, 
that a man who scattered to the winds the ashes of so 
many saints, and who plundered the shrines of so many 
martyrs, should lie himself unhonoured in his grave. 




WHEN God saw the people of England bent on giving 
up into the hands of its civil rulers the visible govenf- 
ment of the Church, wrested from the successor of Peter, 
to whom our Lord had given it, He brought it most 
mercifully to pass in the course of His providence that 
the new supremacy of the Anglican Church should, in 
the first instance, be given to no other than Henry, the 
persecutor not only of Catholics, but of Lutherans and 
Calvinists also, and that it should not be given even 
upon him but in ways the most dishonourable and 
utterly hateful. For God did not suffer the king to 
become the head of the Anglican Church by any other 
means than by first divorcing Catherine, his most 
saintly wife, and putting in her place, still living, Anne 
Boleyn, who was related to him in the first, and more 
than in the first degree, yea, perhaps his own child. 
Moreover, after the evil deeds of Henry and they 
were so many when the English maintained that the 
supremacy belonged of right to the king, God, of His 
goodness, once more, to check their wickedness by the 


force of circumstances, did most compassionately provide 
that the supremacy recently brought in should fall the 
second time upon a king who was a child, too young to 
govern himself, to say nothing of the many priests and 
bishops over whom he was made to rule as supreme even 
in the things of God. 

Then, again, when the English Protestants, thus 
admonished, would not amend their misdoings, God, 
unwearied in His goodness, brought it to pass for the 
third time that the successor of this boy, the supreme 
head of the Church of England, should be none other 
than a woman, who, as they had learned from St. Paul, 1 
could not speak with authority in the Church, and 
certainly ought not therefore to be styled the supreme 
governor thereof. Even that, brought about by the 
mercy of God, wrought no amendment ; and the people, 
according to their hardness and impenitent heart, heap 
up for themselves wTath in the day of wrath, and of 
the revelation of the just judgment of God. 2 

Oh, how marvellous the wisdom and goodness of God 1 
how deplorable the folly and wickedness of men I For 
as God made His wisdom and goodness more and more 
manifest by leaving to the English Protestants no way 
of falling into sin but one that was most foul, then 
another more foul than that, and in the end another 
unutterably loathsome, so the Protestants, going further 
and further in their sin, fill up by degrees the measure 
of their iniquities. They first go from the successor of 
Peter to the successor of Nero, from the Pontiff to the 
king, from the priest to the layman, and what a lay 
man ! Then among laymen from a man to a boy, of 
whose deeds I am going now to speak ; but from the 
boy they go to a woman, of whom also I shall speak 
further on. 

1 i Cor. xiv. 34. 2 Rom. ii. 5. 

CHAP. I.] 



The death of Henry was kept secret 1 for a few days, 
so it is believed ; but as soon as the men in power thought 
it safe to make it known, they proclaimed Edward, the 
son of Henry and Jane Seymour, then in the ninth year 
of his age, 2 king of England and of Ireland. That was 
not all : he who was under tutors and governors like a 
servant, and had need of another to guide and direct 
him, 3 becomes the supreme head 4 on earth of the Church 
of England and of Ireland next after Christ, as if Christ, 
who by His prophets denounced " woe to the land 
whose king should be a child," 5 would have intrusted 
the Church which He loves to be ordered and ruled, and 
that, too, in the last resort, by a boy, and almost an 
infant. But so it pleased God by these circumstances 
to make it plain to all how great was the wrong done by 
the king- no one before him had ever done so 6 when he 

1 Richard Hilles, writing from 
Strasburg to Bullinger, Feb. 25, 
1 547 (Original Letters, No. 1 18), says 
" I have no later news to tell you of 
than that it is certain that our king 
in England died on the 28th of 
January, and that on the following 
Monday his only son was publicly 
proclaimed king." 

2 The king was in his tenth year, 
and Burnet observes upon this mis 
take, " that it shows how little this 
author considered what he writ, 
when in so public a thing as the 
king s age he misreckons a year." 

3 Galat. iv. i, 2. 

4 Burnet writes upon this : " He 
says king Edward was not only de 
clared king of England and Ireland, 
but made supreme head of the 
Church, and upon this runs out to 
show how incapable a child was of 
that power. This is set down in 
such set terms as if there had been 
some special act made for his being 
supreme head of the Church, dis 
tinct from his being proclaimed 
king, whereas there was no such 
thing ; for the supremacy being 

annexed to the crown, the one went 
with the other." This " shows how 
little " Burnet " considered what he 
writ ;" for Sander never said what 
is attributed to him, but that which 
Burnet thinks he ought to have said, 
namely, that by becoming king he 
became also supreme head, &c. 
11 jit summum ecclesice Anglicance et 
Jlibernicce. in terris caput" 

5 Eccles. iv. 1 6. 

6 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. iii. p. 115, Eyston MS. "After 
this divorce he was most ugly, 
deformed, and transformed into a 
quite contrary monstrous shape, so 
far forth that he took upon himself 
the first pestilent pernicious pre 
cedent that ever was before or since 
showed in any realm of Christendom, 
and wherein he is yet alone he 
took upon him, I say, to be supreme 
head of the Church of England, in 
all causes as well ecclesiastical as 
temporal, neither is it to be mar 
velled if he thus fell into schism and 
heresy." Cardinal Pole had also told 
the king, in his letter of July 15, 
1537, written from Venice (Strype, 


assumed this title ; and if in him the assumption of the 
title was the highest folly, it was a greater folly still to 
transmit it to his heir, who was a youth not yet of age. 

After the proclamation of the new king, when it was 
thought that the first thing to be done was to execute 
the last will of the king who was dead, it came to pass, 
by the marvellous justice of God, that the first thing 
done was to treat that will as a nullity. Henry VIII. , by 
destroying the monasteries, churches, and altars which 
had been built for the worship of God, had wickedly 
set aside innumerable wills devoutly made, and could 
God suffer his will to be respected even for an instant 
by those in whom he most trusted ? The king had 
appointed sixteen guardians with equal rights for the 
protection of his child in his ninth year, in order that 
there might not be wanting persons to defend the king 
in his tender years, if any powerful nobleman attempted 
to usurp the kingdom or wrong his son. 1 

Some of these guardians were Catholics, and therefore 
desirous of bringing the kingdom back again into the 
unity of the Church, more especially as they knew the 
king s mind to have been so disposed, and particularly 
when death had come near to him. Others, however, 
seeing that a much greater present gain was to be made 
by robbing the Church than by restitution of stolen 
goods, not only dissented from their colleagues, but 
resolved to go on with the schism. 

Accordingly, Edward Seymour, king Edward s uncle, 
at that time earl of Hertford, but soon after duke of 

Mem., i. ii. 304), that the title of none of them presume to meddle 

supreme head was a burden " which with any of our treasure, or to do 

no other prince beside in their anything appointed by our said will, 

realms, feeling the displeasure of alone, unless the most part of the 

God, dare venture to take upon whole number of the co-executors do 

them, nor ever did since the Church consent, and by writing agree to 

began." the same." The will is printed in 

1 The words of the will are, " That Rymer s Foedera, vi. p. 3, p. 142. 


Somerset, 1 made himself the sole and only guardian of 
the king, 2 and protector of the kingdom, in violation of 
the will of the late king. Some of his co-executors 
encouraged him, some connived at his doings, while 
others, under the influence of fear, dared not stand up 
against him, Thomas Lord Wriothesley, who was lord 
chancellor at Henry s death, alone opposing him openly. 3 
There could be no doubt that this man, commissioned 
by no one, but coming in his own name, would indeed 
admirably execute his office. Being a Calvinist, he had 
nothing more at heart than to pollute and defile still 
more that wretched and disfigured form of religion 
which Henry had commanded to be observed. Henry, 
it is true, destroyed all the monasteries, plundered the 
wealthiest shrines of the martyrs, and threw down also 
certain statues and pictures of the saints which God 
had made miraculous; but he had left, nevertheless, in 
cities and towns, in colleges, in villages, a very large 
number of churches unrifled, which our forefathers had 
built ; and he had preserved their furniture undamaged, 
crucifixes, pictures, vessels, vestments. He also held in 
honour the seven sacraments, and checked and sup 
pressed almost every heresy except that which related 
to the supremacy of the Eoman Pontiff and the religious 

In the first place, this new protector of Edward, and 

1 Edward Seymour, brother of was not granted him by your father s 
Jane Seymour, was made Viscount will; but only by agreement, first 
Beauchamp of Hache, June 5, 1536, amongst us the executors, andafter, of 
immediately after the marriage of others, and upon condition he should 
his sister, and in the following year, do all things by advice of your 
Oct. 1 8, 1537, earl of Hertford. He council." 

was made a baron on the 1 5th, and 3 Burnet charges Sander with 

on the next day, the i6th, of Feb. saying that " king Henry when he 

1547, made duke of Somerset. was dying had made Wriothesley 

2 The lords of the council in a lord chancellor;" but the words of 
letter to the king (Burnet, v. p. 279) Sanders are that he left him in office 
thus speak: "The protectorship and "quern Henricus summum regni 
governance of your most royal person cancellarium reliquerat." 


the faction that clung to him, held the winds through 
out the whole kingdom " that they should not blow upon 
the land ; " 1 that is, they forbade the bishops and the 
priests to preach in any church, in order that " when 
the little ones asked for bread, and there was no one to 
brake it unto them," 2 the deadly poison of Lutherans and 
Calvinists, who alone were allowed to preach, might be 
the more eagerly quaffed by the people consumed with 
thirst. 3 

In the second place, all the images of Christ our 
Saviour, of the Virgin Mother of God, and of the pro 
phets were utterly destroyed, the pictures defaced and 
the statues burnt, thereby showing against whom war 
was declared, and against whom they were fighting. In 
the place of the cross of Christ, which they threw down, 
they put up the arms of the king of England, 4 namely, 
three leopards and three lilies, having for supporters 
the outstretched feet of a serpent and a dog. It was 
like a declaration on their part that they were worship 
pers, not of our Lord, whose image they had comtemp- 
tuously thrown aside, but of an earthly king, whose 
armorial bearings they had substituted for it. 5 

1 Apoc. vii. i. or by the archbishop of Canterbury, 

2 Thren. iv. 4. should take upon him to preach," &c. 

3 Burnet (Hist. Reform., v. p. 588, 4 Stow, Survey, p. 75, ed. 1876. 
cd. Pocock) says, " So falsely has our " Three leopards passant, gardarit ; 
author stated the matter ; " but he which were the whole arms of Eng- 
admits that such a prohibition was land before the reign of Ed ward lit., 
made in the beginning of the second that quartered them with the arms 
year of the king. A proclamation of France, three fleur-de-lis." 

to that effect was published by Ful- 6 Dr. Martin, addressing Cranmer 

ler, and copied from him by Wilkins at Oxford in 1 556, thus speaks (Foxe, 

(Concilia, iv. p. 30) ; but that pro- viii. 56) : " But if you mark the 

clamation begins by saying that a devil s language well, it agreed with 

prior proclamation had been made, your proceedings most truly ; for, 

which had been too much disre- Cast Thyself downward/ said he, 

garded : " Whereas the king s ma- and so taught you to cast all things 

jesty hath by proclamation inhibited downward. Down with the Sacra- 

and commanded that no manner of ment, down with the Mass, down 

persons, except such as was licensed with the altars, down with the arms 

by his highness, the lord protector, of Christ, and up with a lion and a 

CHAP. I.] 



In the third place, the Calvinists, not satisfied when 
they had wrought all this mischief, abolished by an act of 
Parliament l the awful sacrifice of the Body and Blood 
of our Lord, which had of ancient times, from the 
dismissal first of the catechumen and then of the 
faithful, received the name of the Mass, Missa. There 
was no other way to the plundering of the chalices, 
the silver pixes, the crucifixes, the ewers, and other 
sacred vessels, the candlesticks of silver and of brass, 
the sacred vestments of woven gold, the silk banners, 
the money given for the provision of wax, oil, and 
everything else used in the worship of God. And 
lastly, it was the only excuse to give for seizing upon 
the money and lands given for the maintenance of that 
worship, and for converting them into the profane uses 
of private persons. 

In the fourth place, communion under both kinds was 
sanctioned by a law. 2 

dog." So also Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 
1 10 : " Then our churches were more 
like to the Jews synagogues the 
image and the cross of Christ, with 
the image of His Blessed Mother, and 
all His holy saints, being defaced and 
broken, the altars overthrown, and 
the Precious Body of Christ villain 
ously prophaned than to Christian 
churches. The wall all bepainted 
like the Jews temple with places of 
Holy Scripture, and yet worse than 
the Jews temple, for that the mean 
ing of those authorities was to make 
the world believe that to pray to the 
saints, to pray for the dead, to wor 
ship Christ s Body in the Blessed 
Sacrament, was nothing but plain 
superstition and idolatry. Then 
should you have seen in the place 
where Christ s Precious Body was 
reposed, over the altar, and instead 
of Christ s crucifix, the arms of a 
mortal king, set up on high with a 
dog and a lion, which a man might 
well call the abomination of desola 

tion standing in the temple that 
Daniel speaketh of." Grindal (Re 
mains, p. 134), in the reign of Eliza 
beth, ordering the destruction of the 
altar stones and the taking down of 
the cross from the roodloft, "re 
quired a convenient crest" to be 
placed in the crossbeam. It was a 
principle of the Lollards to place the 
king in the room of the Pope, for as 
early as A.D. 139 5 they wished to make 
the white hart, which was the cog 
nisance of Richard III., to be the 
distinction of a priest. 

1 2 & 3 Edw. VI. c. i, suppressed 
the Missal and Breviary, substitut 
ing for them the Book of Common 

2 lEdw.VI.c. i, enacts "thatthe said 
Most Blessed Sacrament be hereafter 
commonly delivered and ministered 
unto the people within this Church 
of England and Ireland, and other the 
king s dominionSjUnder both the kinds, 
that is to say, of bread and wine, 
except necessity otherwise require." 


In the fifth place, divine service was ordered to be 
said in the vulgar tongue, a singularly absurd order, the 
pretence being that when the divine office was used in 
the churches of England, the people might understand 
and be able to answer Amen. Now the people of 
Wales, Cornwall, and Ireland hardly understood a word 
that they heard, for their language is very different from 
that of the English. But if the divine office were said 
in Latin, the priests at least, who know that language, 
might have explained to the people much of that which 
they were reciting. The fitting place for the language 
of any country is in the sermons of the priests, and that 
has been always the usage in the Church. Now, when 
the English prayers were said in Wales, Cornwall, and 
Ireland, it came to pass that less profit was obtained 
from the use of the vulgar tongue than had been ob 
tained when the use of the Latin tongue prevailed. 1 

In the first Parliament of the king s reign the form 
prescribed for the administration of the Eucharist differed 
but slightly from the Catholic Mass, in order that the 

1 Bucer, writing from Cambridge, gether unfit for the sacred office ; 
<it Pentecost 15 50, to Calvin (Original and this merely for the sake of get- 
Letters, No. 253), thus describes the ting rid of the payment of their 
result : " The bishops have not yet yearly pension. Hence you may 
been able to come to an agreement find parishes in which there has not 
xis to Christian doctrine, much less as been a sermon for some years ; . . . 
to discipline, and very few parishes and even our friends are so sparing 
have pastors qualified for their office, of their sermons, that during the 
Most of them are sold to the nobi- whole of Lent, which, nevertheless, 
lity; and there are persons even they still seem to wish to observe, 
among the ecclesiastical order, and \vith the exception of one or two 
those too who wish to be regarded Sundays, they have not once preached 
as gospellers, who hold three or four to the people, not even on the day 
parishes, and even more, without of the commemoration of Christ s 
ministering in any one of them ; but death, or of His resurrection, or of 
they appoint such substitutes as will this day. Sometimes, too, many of 
be satisfied with the least stipend, the parochial clergy so recite and 
and who for the most part cannot administer the service that the people 
read English, and who are in heart have no more understanding of the 
mere Papists. The nobility, too, mysteries of Christ than if the Latin 
have in many parishes preferred instead of the vulgar tongue were 
those who have been in monasteries, still in use." 
who are most unlearned and alto- 

CHAP. I.] 



people might suppose that nothing had been taken away, 
and believe that the words formerly said in Latin had 
been translated into the vulgar tongue. 1 Accordingly 
the canon of the Mass from beginning to end was copied 
almost word for word. The sign of the holy cross was 
retained, at least that which the priest makes with his 
hand. But all the Protestants were not of one mind. 
Those whose sole aim was the riches of the Church cared 
very little for the sign of the cross made in the air ; 
but those who could not endure that the image and 
representation of the death of Christ should even in that 
way be held in honour, 2 very soon obtained the suppres- 

1 2 & 3 Edw. VI. c. i. Hooper, 
writing to Bullinger, Dec. 27, 1549 
(Original Letters, No. 36), thus de 
scribes the issues : " The archbishop 
of Canterbury entertains right views 
as to the nature of Christ s presence 
in the supper, and is now very 
friendly towards myself. . . . Like 
all the other bishops in this coun 
try, he is too fearful about what may 
happen to him. There are here six 
or seven bishops who comprehend 
the doctrine of Christ as far as relates 
to the Lord s Supper with as much 
clearness and piety as one could de 
sire, and it is only the fear for their 
property that prevents them from 
reforming their churches according 
to the rule of God s Word. The 
altars are here in many churches 
changed into tables. The public 
celebration of the Lord s Supper is 
very far from the order and institu 
tion of our Lord. Although it is 
administered in both kinds, yet in 
some places the supper is celebrated 
three times a day. Where they used 
heretofore to celebrate in the morn 
ing the Mass of the apostles, they 
now have the communion of the 
apostles ; where they had the Mass 
of the Blessed Virgin, they now have 
the communion, which they call the 
communion of the Virgin" Where 
they had the principal or high 

Mass, they now have, as they call it, 
the high communion. They still 
retain their vestments and the can 
dles before the altars. In the 
churches they always chant the 
Hours and other hymns relating to 
the Lord s Supper, but in our own 
language. And that Popery may 
not be lost, the Mass priests, although 
they are compelled to discontinue 
the use of the Latin language, yet 
most carefully observe the same tone 
and manner of chanting to which 
they were heretofore accustomed in 
the Papacy." 

2 Hooper disliked the new service 
because it was Lutheran rather than 
Zuinglian. Thus he writes to Bul 
linger, March 27, 15 50 (Original Let 
ters, No. 38) : " It is no small hin 
drance to our exertions that the 
form which our Senate, or Parliament 
as we commonly call it, has pre 
sented for the whole realm, is so 
very defective and of doubtful con 
struction, and in some respects mani 
festly impious. ... I am so much 
offended with that book, and that 
not without abundant reason, that 
if it be not corrected, I neither can 
nor will communicate with the 
Church in the administration of the 
supper. Many altars have been 
destroyed in this city [London] since 
I arrived there." 


sion of these ceremonies, the removal of the canon of 
the Mass, and in its place a new liturgy. 1 This change- 
ableness on the part of the Protestants for some time 
kept back the ignorant people from accepting their 
doctrines, for they used to say, "Let us first see where 
they are going to where they will stand and remain." 

Spiritual questions were discussed in Parliament as if 
the assembly were a synod of bishops questions even 
of ecclesiastical law. Among others a cause of marriage 
was thus settled. 

Matthew Barrow, an artisan, went abroad, leav 
ing his wife and the mother of his children behind. 
The wife was once a laundress in the service of 
Cromwell, in whose service also at the time was Kalph 
Sadler, a man not unknown. 2 I do not know why 
Matthew Barrow went abroad, but some people thought 
that he suspected the honour of his wife, and that he 
therefore left her to avoid the sight of what he could 
neither endure nor check. When he had been absent 
some years his wife heard that he had died, and then 
Sir Ealph Sadler married her. Matthew at last came 
home again, and finding his wife married to another, 
claimed her ; but Sadler, who by this time had children 
by her, refused to part with her. The dispute was 
carried to the highest court, to Parliament itself, in the 
reign both of Henry and his son Edward. The judg 
ment of that court was, that the woman, who was in the 
first place the wife of Matthew Barrow, and again of 

1 The first Book of Common 2 He was a servant of Cromwell 

Prayer, printed in 1 549, represented when Cromwell himself was in the 

the Lutheran opinions, and was ex- service of Cardinal Wolsey. " Sir 

tremely disliked by the Wicliffite or Rafe Salder," says Cavendish (p. 

Zuinglian preachers. It was there- 270, ed. Singer, 1827), " now knight, 

fore abolished, and the second Book was then his clerk, and rode with 

of Common Prayer was put forth in him " when he quitted his master 

1552, teaching the Lollard opinions, to become the servant of Henry 

which by this time had recovered VIII. 
themselves against those of Luther. 

CHAP. I.] 



Sadler, and the mother of children by both, should for 
the future be regarded not as the wife of her first hus 
band, Matthew, but of the second, who was Sadler. 1 Of 
the two, Sadler had the greater influence and wealth, 
and so to him, contrary to the truth of the gospel, was 
given the wife of a man still living, in order to establish 
a new law of marriage, as a new law of divine service 
had been established already. 

1 Upon this Burnet (vol. v. p. 593, 
ed. Pocock) says : " This is, as far as 
I can learn, a forgery from the begin 
ning to the end. And it seems Sad 
ler, that was a privy councillor in 
queen Elizabeth s time, did some 
what that so provoked Sander that 
he resolved to be revenged of him 
and his family by casting such an 
aspersion on him." But as Burnet 
gives no proof of the " somewhat," 
nor even attempts it, the story need 
not be a forgery wrought in malice. 
The doctrine of marriage held by men 
at that time may well have been made 
use of in the affairs of Sir Ealph 
Sadler. The commission appointed, 
first by Henry VIII. and then by 
Edward VI., to reform the laws of 
the Church, proposed that the second 
marriage of the party deserted should 
stand good, notwithstanding the fact 
that the first husband or wife was 
still alive. See Reform. Legum, tit. 
de adulteriis et divortiis, c. 8, 9. 

Sir Walter Scott, in his Life of Sir 

Ralph Sadler, prefixed to the " State 
Papers and Letters," Edinburgh, 1809, 
says that " Mr. Sadler became the 
husband of the widow of one Ralph 
Barrow, who does not seem to have 
been a person of high rank, although 
no good grounds have been dis 
covered for the scandal with which 
Sanders and the Catholic writers 
have stigmatised this union. That 
she was a woman of credit and char 
acter must be admitted, since Lord 
Cromwell, to whom she was related, 
not only countenanced this marriage, 
but was godfather to two of their 
children." Sadler was Cromwell s 
servant, and Cromwell s kindred were 
not persons of high rank, and he may 
well have a laundress among them ; 
and most certainly his notions about 
the validity of the bond of marriage 
were not strict. As for Burnet, he 
denounced the history of Poynet in 
the same way, and upon no autho 




MEANWHILE the English Catholics, and especially the 
more learned among them, who hoped for the repression 
of the schism of Henry VIII. , at least after his death, 
were blaming themselves for not having more resolutely 
set their faces against it when it began ; they were living 
wretchedly in great misery and grief, for they saw now 
that the schism was so far from dying out that it had 
grown into a much more deadly heresy. St. John 
Chrysostom, 1 writing against the heathens who denied 
the Divinity of Christ, uttered the praises of the ancient 
faith of this country, which he specially commended for 
this, that altars had long ago been raised in Britain in 
honour of Christ. These are his words : " Churches have 
been built and altars raised in the British Isles." But 
now, after the lapse nearly of twelve hundred years, those 
very altars are thrown down and destroyed, not by 
pagans, but by men who call themselves Christians. 
What must any one, on reading that Homily of St. John 
Chrysostom, have felt when he saw this destruction? 
He must have wept and moaned, for if the altars of 
Christ were of old signs of Christian belief, the ruin of 
the altars must be a sign of antichristian unbelief. 

Men now were discussing matters of faith in every 

1 S. Jo. Chrysost., Op., i. p. 575, ed. Bena. 



workshop, tavern, and alehouse : every gossiping old 
woman, every silly old man, every wordy declaimer, as 
St. Jerome 1 complained of old in short, every one took 
up the sacred books, pulled them to pieces, taught them 
to others before they had been taught them themselves. 
Some discoursed to women, others learned from women 
what they taught to men ; and the Apocalypse especially, 
in which there are as many mysteries as there are words, 
was in everybody s mouth. The Protestants proved 
their opinion from it, and took passages therefrom utterly 
irrelevant, which they interpreted in their own sense, 
boldly explaining to others what they did not understand 
themselves. It is so in the beginning of all sects, and 
accordingly the English people did nothing else at this 
time but hear or preach some new thing. 

Stephen, bishop of Winchester; Edmund Bonner, 2 
bishop of London; Cuthbert Tunstall, bishop of Dur 
ham ; Nicholas Heath, 3 bishop of Worcester ; and 
[George] Day, 4 bishop of Chichester all of these vener 
able prelates resisted these innovations as well as they 

1 Ep. liii. ad Paulinum, torn. i. p. 
275, ed. Villars. 

2 Edmund Bonner, native of Wor 
cestershire, educated at Broadgates 
Hall, Oxford, into which, he was 
admitted about A.D. 1512. In 1525 
he took the degree of doctor in law. 
He was one of the king s chaplains, 
commissary of Cranmer, and in 1535 
was made archdeacon of Leicester. 
He was very zealous in promoting 
the divorce, and so he tells us 
himself behaved insolently to the 
Pope. He accepted the bishopric of 
Hereford from the king, and then 
that of London, and was consecrated 
April 4, 1 540. He was not a bishop, 
for he received no Bulls. He ac 
cepted all the changes in religion, 
and even the English services in the 
beginning of the reign of Edward 
VI. But he did not accept every 
thing, and was put in prison, de 

prived of the see, which was given 
to Ridley, who threw down the 

3 Nicholas Heath was consecrated 
with Bonner, without Bulls, to the 
see of Rochester, from which Henry 
VIII. removed him to Worcester, 
A.D. 1543. He was thrown into 
prison, and Hooper was put in his 
place, A.D. 1551. Queen Mary set 
him free, and then he confessing his 
guilty share in the schism, was 
reconciled to the Church, and made 
archbishop of York, A.D. 1555. 

4 George Day, master of St. John s 
College, and then provost of King s 
College, Cambridge, consecrated by 
Cranmer in schism May 6, 1543. 
He submitted to all the changes 
that was made till he was ordered 
to throw down the altars. That he 
refused to do, and Edward VI. took 
his bishopric from him. 



[BOOK ii. 

could. But on the other side, and in the defence of 
heresy, stood Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, raised 
from the house of Anne Boleyn, as I said before, 1 to the 
archbishopric ; and with him all those who were made 
bishops by Edward VI. Kidley, 2 Hooper, 3 and Poynet, 4 
superintendents 5 of London, Gloucester, and Winchester. 
Others held a middle course though nothing of the 
kind is allowable in the service of God hoping, it is 
true, for the triumph of the Catholic faith, but at the 
same time professing heresy, lest they should lose any 
thing for the sake of Christ. 

Hitherto, indeed, Cranmer himself had been a Henri- 
cian, that is, a follower of Henry VIII. , from whose in 
structions he never dared to depart even a hair s breadth 
in anything. So long as the king lived, Cranmer heard 

1 See bk. i. cliap. xv. p. 109. 

2 Nicholas Ridley, born in Nor 
thumberland, and educated at Cam 
bridge, proctor of the university in 
1534, and in 1540 master of Pem 
broke Hall. Cranmer made him 
vicar of Herne, and prebendary of 
Canterbury. In 1545 he was one 
of the prebendaries of Westminster, 
and in 1 547 vicar of Soham, on the 
presentation of his college. Edward 
VI. made him bishop of Rochester 
in the same year, and licensed him 
to hold with Rochester -the two 
vicarages of Herne and Soham, and 
the two prebends of Canterbury and 
Westminster, and April 1550 trans 
lated him to London, having first 
deprived Bonner of the see. 

John Hooper, born in Somerset, 
was educated at Oxford ; but betray 
ing early his heretical opinions, 
wandered abroad, and became a 
friend of Bullinger, and others of 
the same sort, and married, though 
a priest. He returned to England 
in May 1549, and found his " father 
still alive, and though not a friend 
to the gospel, yet not an enemy to 
it." Original Letters, 39. He was 
made chaplain to the duke of 

Somerset, and preached constantly 
against the faith. He demurred to 
the ecclesiastical dress on being 
made a bishop, but he yielded, and 
held the two sees of Worcester and 
Gloucester, as Foxe (vi. 643) says, 
he "abhorred nothing more than 
gain." He fed the poor in his 
palace at Worcester, but "being 
before examined by him or his 
deputies, of the Lord s prayer, the 
articles of their faith, and ten com 
mandments." Foxe, vi. 644. 

4 John Ponet or Poinet was born 
in Kent, and died at Strasburg 
about the loth of August 1556. 
See below, p. 208. 

5 This was the word used instead 
of bishop by the sectaries : Elizabeth 
Young, in her examination in 1558, 
is asked by Dr. Martin, " What do 
ye call Scory 1 " who was a bishop in 
the days of Edward VI., and answers, 
"Our superintendent." Foxe, Acts 
and Mon., viii. p. 540. And Strype 
(Mem., ii. ii. p. 141) confesses that 
"the word superintendent began to be 
affected, . . . and the rather perhaps 
being a word used in the Protestant 
churches of Germany. This the 
Papists made sport with." 




Mass every day, and on certain days even said it him 
self. His greatest distress was that he could not show 
abroad as his wife the woman who was living with him. 
The king would not allow him to do so. He must 
therefore keep her secretly in his house. When he 
went abroad, he was compelled to carry her from place 
to place hidden from sight in a chest. 1 

But when the king died, Cranmer ceased to be a 
Henrician, and became wholly a Lutheran, knowing at 
the same time that Henry had been a most earnest 
opponent of Luther. He printed and published a 
catechism, 2 dedicated to Edward VI., wherein he taught 

a land and put in a gallery. And 
this among other being much re 
commended to the shipmen, as con 
taining precious stuff belonging to 
my lord s grace, they severed that 
from the rest and put it up and 
long against the wall in my lord s 
chamber, with the woman s head 
downward, which putting her in 
jeopardy to break her neck, she was 
forced at length to cry out. And so 
the chamberlain perceiving the error, 
took her forth foully disfigured, and 
as good as half dead. This is a 
most certain story, and testified at 
this day by Cranmer s son s widow, 
yet living, to divers gentlemen her 
friends, from whom myself had it." 
Cranmer seems to have kept his 
wife in secret till the year 1550, 
when he showed her openly ; for 
that must be the explanation of the 
letter of Stumphius to Bullinger 
(Original Letters, 223) : " There is 
also the greatest hope as to religion, 
for the archbishop of Canterbury 
has lately married a wife." 

2 Catechismus, that is to say, " a 
shorte instruction into Christian 
religion for the syngular commoditie 
and profyte of children and yong 
people. Lond. by Nycolas Hyll for 
Gwalter Lynne, 1 548." The book is 
a translation of the translation made 
by Justus Jonas into Latin of a Ger 
man catechism, and John Burcher 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. iii. p. 98. " The archbishop of 
Canterbury was married in king 
Henry s days, but kept his woman 
very close, and sometimes carried 
her about with him in a great 
chest." When the palace in Can 
terbury was in danger of destruction 
by fire, " he caused the chest with 
all speed to be conveyed out of 
clanger, and gave great charge of it, 
crying out that his evidences and 
other writings which he esteemed 
above all worldly treasure were in 
the chest. All this I heard out 
of the mouth of a gentleman that 
was there present." " His brother 
also, the archdeacon, was likewise 
married, and kept privily his woman; 
and being thereof examined by Dr. 
Thirlby, that was afterwards bishop 
of Ely, and had commission from 
the king for the examination of such 
matters, swore upon a book that he 
was not married. And indeed he 
might truly have sworn that he was 
never lawfully married." The i8th 
of December 1543, says Stow (p. 585), 
" the archbishop of Canterbury s 
palace at Canterbury was brent, and 
therein was brent his brother-in- 
law and other men." The Three 
Conversions of England, vol. ii. 
chap. vii. p. 37 1 : " It happened at 
(Iravesend, where the bishop lay 
one night, his chests were brought 



[BOOK ii. 

that every Christian who received the Eucharist received 
in his mouth the very true Body and Blood of Christ, 
either under, in, or with the bread. 1 But a few months 
had hardly gone by when the miserable man found out 
that the protector of the king, the duke^ of Somerset, 
was a Calvinist, not a Lutheran. 2 What was he to do ? 
He recasts the catechism, changes his language, 3 and he 
who was once a Henrician, then a Lutheran, becomes a 
Calvinist. 4 

in a letter, Oct. 29, 1 548, to Bullinger 
(Original Letters, 298), thus speaks 
of the fruits it brought forth: " The 
archbishop of Canterbury, moved, 
no doubt, by the advice of Peter 
Martyr and other Lutherans, has 
ordered a catechism of some Lutheran 
opinions to be translated and pub 
lished in our language. This little 
book has occasioned no little discord, 
so that fightings have frequently 
taken place among the common 
people on account of their diversity 
of opinion, even during the sermons. 
The government, roused by this 
contention, have convoked a synod 
of the bishops to consult about 
religion." John ab Ulmis, writing 
to Bullinger from London, Aug. 18, 
1548 (Original Letters, 185), says, 
" He has lately published a cate 
chism in which he has not only 
approved that foul and sacrilegious 
transubstantiation of the Papists in 
the holy supper of our Saviour, but 
all the dreams of Luther seem to 
him sufficiently well-grounded, per 
spicuous, and lucid." 

1 Cranmer admits the fact (Jenkyns, 
ii. 440). " And in a catechism by 
me translated and set forth/ he says, 
" I used like manner of speech, say 
ing that with our bodily mouths 
we receive the Body and Blood of 
Christ." But he goes on to say that 
he did not mean it. "Which my 
saying," he adds, "divers ignorant 
persons, not used to read old ancient 
authors, nor acquainted with their 
phrase and manner of speech, did 
carp and reprehend for lack of good 

2 Foxe, viii. 34, repeats this state 
ment. " During all this meantime 
of king Henry aforesaid, until the 
entering of king Edward, it seemed 
that Cranmer was scarcely yet 
thoroughly persuaded in the right 
knowledge of the sacrament, or at 
least was not yet fully ripened in 
the same ; wherein shortly after he 
being more groundedly conformed 
by conference with bishop Ridley, 
in process of time did so profit in 
more ripe knowledge, that at last he 
took upon him the defence of that 
whole doctrine, that is, to refute 
and throw down, first the corporal 
presence, secondly the phantastical 
transubstantiation, thirdly the idola 
trous adoration." 

3 In his examination at Oxford, 
Cranmer is thus addressed by Dr. 
Martin (Jenkyns, iv. 96) : " Then 
there you defended another doctrine 
touching the sacrament, by the same 
token that you sent to Lynne your 
printer, that whereas in the first 
print there was an affirmative, that 
is to say, Christ s body really in the 
sacrament, you sent then to your 
printer to put in a not, whereby 
it came miraculously to pass that 
Christ s body was clean conveyed 
out of the sacrament." To this 
Cranmer answered, u I remember 
there were two printers of my said 
book, but where the same not was 
put in I cannot tell. See also 
Foxe, viii. 57. 

4 John ab Ulmis, writing to Bul 
linger from Oxford, Nov. 27, 1548, 
says that Cranmer was at that time 
a Zuinglian or Calvinist ; these are 




Many Protestants resented this, and therefore assigned 
the first rank in preaching the gospel, not to Cranmer, 
but rather to Hugh Latimer, 1 a heretic loose of tongue, 
whom they everywhere called the Apostle of the English, 
as if he had been the first who preached to them the 
true gospel of God. They knew not that even Latimer 
himself had been at first a Lutheran, and not a Calvinist. 
Latimer, moreover, admitted publicly at Oxford that he 
continued a Lutheran even to his old age, and that his 
conversion to Calvinism was the work of Thomas 
Cranmer more than of any other man, brought about 
a few years ago before his death. 2 

presence/ By the real presence lie 
means Lutheranism, into which he 
was seduced by Ridley. There is 
therefore no reason for rejecting the 
account in the text. Cranmer, urged 
by Ridley, accepted Lutheranism and 
entertained Peter Martyr; but after 
wards, under the direction of the 
Pole a Lasco, held the Zuinglian or 
Calvinistic opinion on the Eucharist. 
1 Hugh Latimer, born probably 
A.D. 1491, in Thurcaston, Leicester 
shire, was educated at Cambridge, 
where he took his degrees as a 
zealous Catholic, and was cross- 
bearer of the university. He was 
perverted by Bilney, and at last, 
when known to be deep in heresy, 
was brought by Cranmer to preach 
at the court. Henry VIII. gave 
him the bishopric of Worcester, 
and he was consecrated by Cranmer 
Sept. 26, 1535, Gardiner assisting, 
but without Bulls or any sanction 
whatever of the Pope. He resigned 
his see in 1539, because he could no 
longer bear the constraint of Henry 
VIII. and the six articles. 

a Traheron, writing from London, 
Sept. 28, 1 548, to Bullinger (Original 
Letters, 151), says : "You must know 
that Latimer has come over to our 
opinion respecting the true doctrine of 
the Eucharist, together with the arch 
bishop of Canterbury and the other 
bishops who heretofore seemed to be 

his words (Original Letters, 186): 
" That abominable error and silly 
opinion of a carnal eating has been 
long since banished and entirely done 
away with. Even that Thomas [Cran 
mer] himself, about whom I wrote to 
you when I was in London, by the good 
ness of God and the instrumentality 
of that most upright and judicious 
man Mr. John a Lasco, is in a great 
measure recovered from his danger 
ous lethargy." Hooper, writing to 
the same Bullinger, from London, 
Dec. 27, 1549 (ibid. 36), says, "The 
archbishop of Canterbury entertains 
right views as to the nature of 
Christ s presence in the supper, and 
is now very friendly towards my 
self." Strype (Life of Cranmer, bk. 
ii. c. 25) seems to assign but one 
change of opinion, and that due to 
the influence of Ridley. But the 
words of Cranmer, by him there 
quoted, show that the archbishop 
was a Lutheran only a short time 
before the publication of this cate 
chism. " I confess of myself," says 
Cranmer, "that not long before I 
wrote the said catechism, I was in 
that , error of the real presence, as 
I was many years past in many 
other errors as of transubstantia- 
tiori, of the sacrifice propitiatory," 
&c. Cranmer speaks of two errors 
he held successively, " that of tran- 
substantiation and that of the real 

1 84 


[BOOK ii. 

The protector, the duke of Somerset, had a brother, 
Thomas Seymour, admiral of the fleet, who had married 
Catherine Parr, the last wife of Henry VIII. , after the 
king s death. 1 Between her and the wife of the pro 
tector there sprung a quarrel about precedence, and the 
quarrel was not confined to the wives, it passed on to 
the husbands. 2 And as the rivalry grew from day to 
day, and as the protector s wife gave her husband no 
rest, matters came at last to this : the protector, who, 
though he ruled the king, was yet ruled by his wife, 
must put his brother to death, 3 that he might satisfy 
his ambition without let or hindrance. But as Thomas 
Seymour was innocent of everythiug for which he 
deserved to die, except heresy, and as the protector, 
himself a heretic, could not lay that to his brother s 

Lutherans." In the Disputation of 
Oxford, April 1554, Latimer said 
(Remains, p. 265, ed. Parker So 
ciety), " I have long sought for the 
truth in this matter of the sacra 
ment, and have not been of this 
mind past seven years ; and my 
lord of Canterbury s book hath espe 
cially confirmed my judgment here 
in." He then, in answer to the 
question that he was a Lutheran, 
says, * No, I \vas a Papist ; for I 
never could perceive how Luther 
could defend his opinion without 
transubstantiation." It seems that 
Latimer, in spite of his Lutheranisin, 
never quite denied the doctrine of 
the Eucharist while Henry VIII. 

1 Edward YI. s Journal (Burnet 
v. 5, ed. Pocock) says, " The lord 
Seymour of Sudeley married the 
queen, whose name was Katerine, 
with which marriage the lord pro 
tector was much offended." Heylyn 
(Hist. Reform., p. 71) says, "That 
they might appear in greater splen 
dour, he took into his hands the 
episcopal house belonging to the 
bishop of Bath and Wells, which 
being by him much enlarged and 

beautified, came afterwards to the 
possession of the earl of Arundel, 
best known of late times by the 
name of Arundel House." 

2 Foxe, vi. 283. " Now it hap 
pened upon what occasion I know 
not that there fell a displeasure 
betwixt the said queen and the 
duchess of Somerset, and therefore 
also in the behalf of their wives 
displeasure and grudge began be 
tween the brethren." 

Sir John Hayward reports the like 
story in his Life of Edward VI. ; but 
Strype, without any authority (Mem., 
ii. ii. 188), writes : "And verily all 
this is the less to be credited, viz., the 
controversy between the two wives 
for precedency, and the duchess of 
Somerset s setting her husband upon 
this mischief, because it is taken 
from lying Sanders, or at the best 
from vulgar report." 

3 Foxe, vi. 283. " As many there 
were who reported that the duchess 
of Somerset had wrought his death, 
so many more there were who . . . 
affirmed . . . that the fall of the one 
brother would be the ruin of the 




charge, it was necessary to have recourse to falsehood. 
A charge is contrived without difficulty by another 
Jezebel ; but the difficulty lay in making it public. 
They betake themselves to this new apostle of the 
English, Hugh Latimer. The protector persuaded him 
to denounce his brother as a traitor to the people in one 
of his sermons. Hugh Latimer, whose apostolate was 
that of lying, undertook the task. He went into the 
pulpit and said that Thomas Seymour had plotted 
against the life of the king, and therefore deserved to 
suffer death. 1 The people now did not shout as usual ; 
it was ashamed of its own apostle, when it heard him 
falsely accusing an innocent man. Thomas Seymour, 
however, was found guilty of treason, arid beheaded 
March 20 [i549]. 2 

Many also in these days wrote admirable treatises in 
defence of the Catholic faith. Dr. Peryn, 3 of the Order 

1 John Burclier (Original Letters, 
301), in a letter to Bullinger, March 
12, 1549, says that the admiral 
"entered in the dead of night" a 
room close to that of the king with 
the intention of committing murder, 
and on the next morning, January 
19, was committed to the Tower. 
Whether the story be true or not 
remains a question. Hooper (Ori 
ginal Letters, 29), writing to Bui- 
linger, says " He was beheaded and 
divided into four quarters ; with 
how much unwillingness he suffered 
death, Master John Utenhovius, who 
is the bearer of this letter, will fully 
explain to you by word of mouth." 
Latimer (Sermons, pp. 161, 162, ed. 
Parker Society) says "that he died 
very dangerously, irksomely, hor 
ribly. . . . But surely he was a 
wicked man ; the realm is well rid 
of him : it hath a treasure that he 
is gone. He knoweth his fate by 
this, he is either in joy or in pain." 

2 The warrant for the execution 
was signed, among others, by the 

brother, the duke of Somerset, and 
Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of 
Canterbury. Upon this Burnet 
(Hist. Reform., ii. p. 187, ed. Pocock) 
says, " One particular seemed a little 
odd, that Cranmer signed the war 
rant for his execution, which being 
in a cause of blood was contrary to 
the canon law." He then proceeds 
to show his sense of that law, and 
ends by saying, " It seems that 
Cranmer thought his conscience was 
under no tie from those canons, and 
so judged it not contrary to his func 
tion to sign that order." Cranmer 
had released himself from other 
canons beside those, and it would 
be difficult to say what canons he 
held to be binding on him. 

3 William Peryn, born in Shrop 
shire, and educated in Oxford, fled 
to the Continent in the beginning of 
the schism, and returned in the year 
1543. He seems to have stained his 
profession in 1547 by his recantation 
of a sermon in defence of the doc 


trine of images. 

In June," 



[BOOK ii. 

of St. Dominic, Dr. Smith, 1 the king s professor of theo 
logy in the University of Oxford, and Stephen, bishop 
of Winchester, surpassing all others in acuteness. When 
the Homilies, written in English, were brought to him, 
in which the doctrine of justification by faith only was 
wickedly and impiously set forth, he at once objected to 
them, saying that there was heresy in the Homilies, and 
that they ought never to be read in the hearing of the 

And as he held this language, not only in private, but 
in the pulpit also, and most vehemently resisted, both 
by word of mouth and by writing, the heresy of Calvin 
and of Luther, not only in the matter of justification, 
but on very many other points, especially that of the 
Eucharist, he was thrown into prison on the last day of 
July. 2 

In the next year, about the feast of St. John the Bap- 

Strype (Mem., ii. i. 61), "one Pe- 
rin, a Black Friar, recanted in the 
parish church of St. Andrew, Under- 
shaft, London." 

1 Richard Smith, born in Worces 
tershire, became a fellow of Mer- 
ton College in Oxford in 1527, rector 
of Cnxham, then principal of St. 
Alban s Hall, reader of theology in 
Magdalene College, and finally 
master of Whittington College, Lon 
don. When Henry VIII. founded 
the professorship of theology in Ox 
ford, Dr. Smith was the first who 
held the chair. In the reign of Ed 
ward VI. he abandoned all his pre 
ferments, but was restored in the 
second year of queen Mary, made 
one of her chaplains, and also a 
canon of Christ Church. He lost 
all his preferments when Eliza 
beth obtained the throne, and was 
committed to the care of Matthew 
Parker at Lambeth, by whose per 
suasion he was brought again to 
make another recantation, if the ac 
count be true in the Life of Parker, 
De Antiquit. Britan. Eccles., 552, ed. 

Drake. He escaped at last and 
went abroad, was one of the first 
professors in the University of Douai, 
where he died July 9, 1563. Jewell, 
writing from Salisbury, June I, 1560, 
to Peter Martyr, says he heard that 
Smith is in Wales " keeping a hired 
tavern." He had said in a former 
letter to the same person, written 
March 20, 1559, that he had been 
deprived of his professorship in Ox 
ford for uncleanness of life. Both 
stories rest on the credit of Jewell. 
He is also said to have recanted 
more than once. 

2 This seems to be an error ; it 
should have been June. Edward 
VI. in his Journal (Bnrnet, v. p. 7, 
ed. Pocock) wrote, " Upon St. 
Peter s Day the bishop of Winches 
ter was committed to the Tower ; " 
but it was not on that day. On that 
day the bishop preached before the 
king, and on the following day, June 
30, was committed to the Tower. 
He had been in the Fleet also the 
year before, from Sept. 25 till the 
7th day of Jan. 1548. 

CHAP. II. ] 


I8 7 

tist, the people of Cornwall and Devonshire, 1 when they 
saw their children baptized in a new fashion of which 
they had never heard before, and not in the ancient way 
to which they and their fathers had been accustomed ; 2 
when they saw that the sacrifice of the Mass had been 
utterly suppressed, and the altars, not those of Jupiter 
or Diana, but of God Almighty and the one Mediator 
Jesus Christ, everywhere thrown down and destroyed, 
they took it most grievously to heart, and flew to arms 
for the defence of the faith, and laid siege to Exeter. 
But while driving back with their arrows the troops of 
horsemen brought from Cleves, 3 they fell into disorder 

1 John Burclier in a letter to Bui- 
linger, Aug. 25, 1549 (Original Let 
ters, 306), says: "In the western 
part of England, which is divided 
into Cornwall and Devonshire, these 
rebels assembled in the months of 
June and July last, to the numbers 
it is believed of 16,000 men. The 
leaders of the rebels in the first place 

E reclaimed deliverance to the people 
*om the injustice and oppression of 
the nobility, who, partly by force 
and partly by fraud, had converted 
to their own use the pastures which 
formerly had been common. And 
for this cause the rebellion extended 
through all parts of England." 

2 Baptism was not only adminis 
tered in English, but the adminis 
tration was restricted to Sundays 
and other holy days. The sixth ar 
ticle of the " demands of the people " 
was : " We will that our curates 
minister the sacrament of baptism at 
all times, as well in the week day 
as on the holy day." 

3 Prevarication of the Holy Church s 
Liberties, chap. iv. s. 16, Eyston MS. 
Theearl of Warwick, afterwards duke 
of Northumberland, " adviseth the 
protector to make a further progress 
in the English schism, thereby as 
well to ratify the Church lands already 
gotten, as to make a further sport of 
the Church s dowry ; and because 
this could not be done without great 

difficulty, to call in some foreign 
forces, not directly in show for such 
a purpose, as too distasteful to the 
people, but under pretence to fetch 
the young queen of Scots in person 
for a wife to the king, according to 
a treaty begun by king Henry VIII. 
The protector conformeth himself to 
the advice, calleth in mercenary 
Germans ; and, to blind the people, 
goeth personally into Scotland with 
a well-ordered army ; being a man 
ner of wooing not well liked by the 
earl of Huntley and other the 

Burnet (Hist. Eeform., iii. 329, 
ed. Pocock) says : " The true secret 
of it on both sides was this : 
the bulk of the people of England 
was still possessed with the old su 
perstition to such a degree that it 
was visible they could not be de 
pended on in any matter that related 
to the alterations that were made, 
or were designed to be made ; where 
as the Germans were full of zeal on 
the other side, so that they might 
well be trusted to : and the princes 
of Germany, who were then kept 
under by the emperor, so that they 
neither durst nor could keep their 
troops at home, but hoped they 
might at some better time have an 
occasion to use them, were willing 
to put them in the hands of the pre 
sent government of England." 


amid the baggage, which was left behind, either on pur 
pose or because it could not be saved, and were routed 
by the troops which had fled, but now had returned to 
the fight. Thus the war came to an end, having no 
other issue than this : some of those who were concerned 
in it, we may believe, delivered their own souls out of 
heresy ; it was not given them to deliver their brethren 
out of the slavery of Satan. 

Many others, also, throughout the realm, especially in 
Norfolk, took up arms. The reasons they gave for their 
rising were the enclosures made wrongfully by the rich 
to the damage of the common people. Many parks 
of the noblemen were thrown open, fences destroyed, 
ditches filled, fishponds emptied, deer and rabbits stolen. 
Some lost their goods, and others their lives also. Thus 
God showed the men in power how wickedly they had 
done when they withdrew from the obedience of the 
Pope and of their fathers in God ; for he who, contrary 
to the law, refuses to submit to his superior, is most 
justly disowned by his own subjects. But as the princes 
understood none of these things, God stirred up enemies 
abroad against them. 



THE French took advantage of these troubles, and 
attacked the forts and garrisons of the city of Boulogne, 
which still remained in the hands of the English ; and 
John Dudley, earl of Warwick, 1 and afterwards duke of 
Northumberland, found therein a reason for censuring 
the government of the protector, and then having ob 
tained the consent of the rest of the council, publicly 
charged him with maladministration of the state. The 
protector flew for safety to the castle of Windsor, 2 
taking the king with him ; but when he saw that the 

1 Sir John Dudley, " son to that the other members of the council in 
Dudley" (Burnet, ii. 86) "who was London had determined, as it was 
attainted and executed the first year right they should, to make inquiry 
of king Henry VIII. s reign," was into the protector s conduct. Large 
made earl of Warwick Feb. 17, 1547, numbers were collected by each party, 
within a month of the accession of As to myself, I determined not to 
Edward VI., and Oct. n, 1551, interfere, because I had great enemies 
duke of Northumberland. He was on both sides. The king was accom- 
also made earl marshall, after the panied in his flight by his uncle the 
execution of the duke of Somerset, duke of Somerset, the archbishop of 
and finally made himself master of Canterbury, the comptroller of the 
the kingdom. household, and some of the lords 

2 Original Letters, No. 37. Hooper, of the bedchamber. All the other 
writing from London, Feb. 5, 1550, nobility and men of rank had lent 
to Bullinger, says : " On the 6th of their influence to the council, who 
October the king, together with the conducted the affair in London, 
protector, fled from the palace, which However, by the mercy of God, the 
we commonly call Hampton-Court, business was at length settled with- 
to another castle called in our Ian- out bloodshed." 

guage Windsor, for this reason, that 


whole nobility ranged themselves on the side of War 
wick, and that his followers were few, he gave himself 
up, and was sent to prison October 14 [I549]. 1 Later 
on, however, in the next year, on the 6th of February, 
he recovered his liberty, the earl of Warwick and he 
being reconciled. That friendship lasted but a short 
time, though the town of Boulogne, which was the 
seeming occasion of the quarrel between them, was, by 
the consent both of the protector and of the earl of War 
wick, given up to the French on the 25th day of April. 
Now, in order to bring the duke of Somerset the 
more assuredly within his power, the earl of Warwick 
promised certain persons so it is said whom he knew 
to be Catholics, to restore the Catholic religion, and to 
banish heresy, if they would help him to remove the 
protector. There was no reason for distrusting his 
word, for so great was his authority that he might well 
be able to perform his promise ; besides, they knew that 
he hated the heresy, and that he was a man who believed 
either in the Catholic religion or in none. Accordingly 
they exerted themselves to the utmost of their power to 
bring down the protector and to throw him into prison. 
But when they reminded the earl of Warwick of his 
promise, he scowled at them, and told them that if they 
cared for their lives they would never again speak of 
restoring the Catholic religion. 2 

1 Original Letters, No. 37. " On hensive of a change in religion, but 
the 1 4th of Oct. the duke of Somer- as yet no alteration has taken place." 
set with some others was sent to the He writes again, Dec. 27 : " We 
Tower of London, from whence he is were in much alarm, and very great 
not yet come out : but by the bless- fear possessed the minds of the godly 
ing of God he will be set at liberty as to the success that the religion of 
either this evening or to-morrow." Christ, just now budding forth in 

2 Hooper, writing to Bullinger, England, would meet with upon the 
Nov. 7, 1549 (Original Letters, 35), fall of the duke of Somerset, who is 
seems to refer to this arrangement, still confined in the Tower of London. 
" My patron, who was first minister ... No change in religion has taken 
and protector, is in the Tower of place among us, and we hope that no 
London. . . . We are greatly appre- alteration will be made hereafter." 


Some of them took this exceedingly to heart, looking 
upon the earl of Warwick not only as a man who broke 
his word, but as one who used his authority oppressively, 
and therefore went over to the protector, whom they re 
garded as a man of gentler temper. Thereupon Sir Thomas 
Arundel, a man of influence and a Catholic, secretly 
visited the protector after his release from prison ; but 
.Dudley, on discovering the fact, had him, not long 
after, brought to the block, Sir Thomas dying in the 
peace of the Church. 1 

Jane Butcher, in the county of Kent, in addition to 
the profession of Calvinism, which she followed, denied, 
with Valentinus, that our Lord was incarnate of the 
Virgin Mary, who was but the channel through which 
He came into the world. Then, when she saw that the 
Calvinists disliked her opinion, she told them further 
that there was a time when even they believed that 
the body of Christ was in the Eucharist under the 
appearance of bread and wine, and that Anne Askew, 2 
who denied it, was not long ago held to be a heretic and 
publicly burned. She, therefore, had no doubt that, as 
the Calvinists now believed all that Anne Askew then 
maintained, so before long they would believe that 
which she was holding now. 3 She was burned in Smith- 
field, London, May i2. 4 

1 Feb. 26, 1552. came yourselves soon after to believe 

2 Anne Askew, or Anne Kyme, and profess the same doctrine for 
recanted her heresies, before Bonner which you burned her. And now, 
and others, March 20, 1544, and two forsooth, you will needs burn me for 
years afterwards, in June or July a piece of flesh, and in the end you 
1 546, being a heretic relapsed, was will come to believe this also, when 
burned in Smithfield. Foxe, v. 542, you have read the Scriptures and 
550. understand them ! J When she came 

3 Strype, Memorials, ii. i. p. 335. to die in Smithfield, and Dr. Scory 
" When she was condemned to die endeavoured to convert her, she 
for her denial of Christ s taking flesh scoffed at him, and said he lied like 
of the Blessed Virgin, she said to a rogue, and bade him go read the 
the judges, It is a goodly matter scriptures." 

to consider your ignorance. It was 4 Edward VI., in his journal, says 
not long ago since you burned Anne that the execution of Joan of Kent 
Ascue for a piece of bread, and yet took place May 2 ; so also Micronius, 



[BOOK ii. 

Meanwhile the superintendents and their clergy, 
Lutherans as well as Calvinists, though some of them 
were religious, and others consecrated according to the 
Catholic rite, and therefore bound by the vow of chastity, 
in virtue of their ordination, according to the ancient 
and notorious custom of the Western Church, threw 
aside all sense of shame and took to themselves wives. 1 
Then, when they saw that their children were not re 
garded as legitimate, but taken for bastards, or children 
born in adultery, they had recourse to the lay power of 
the civil parliament, petitioning it to make their children 
legitimate. Thereupon an act of Parliament 2 was made, 

in a letter to Bullingjer, from London, 
May 20, 1550 (Original Letters, No. 
260) : " A few days since, namely, 
on the 2d of May, a certain woman 
was burned alive for denying the 
incarnation of Christ." Cranmer 
pronounced her a heretic April 30, 
1549, and delivered her over the 
same day to the secular arm ; but she 
was "kept in hope of conversion," 
says the king in his journal, " and 
on the 3oth of April the bishop of 
London and the bishop of Ely were 
to persuade her, but she withstood 
them, and reviled the preacher that 
preached at her death ; " and well she 
might, for that preacher was Scory. 
The chronicle of the Grey Friars 
(ed. Camden Society, p. 66) says she 
said to Scory "that he lied like a 
knave." Stow (p. 604), having the 
chronicle probably before him, says 
he like, &c., omitting the offensive 
word. If she was burned on the 2d of 
May, the bishops of London and Ely 
had but brief conferences with her. 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. iii. p. 99, Eyston MS. : " One 
Holgate, archbishop of York, a man 
about fourscore years of age, which 
had been a religious man also, mar 
ried a young girl of fourteen or 
fifteen years of age, and yet, for 
three causes, she never was his wife : 
the one for that he had been a reli 
gious man, and had solemnly vowed 
chastity ; the second for that he was 

a priest ; and the third for that she 
was betrothed to another man, and 
by very force kept from him, as I 
have heard the party myself confess 
and complain in this queen s time, 
and that he intended to procure pro 
cess out for him. But whether the 
archbishop s death, or some composi 
tion staid the suit, or to what end 
the matter came, I know not." 
Bui-net had access to the council 
books, and he writes thus (Hist. 
Reform., iii. 344) : " There was no 
thing that opened all men s mouths 
more than a complaint entered in 
the council book, made by one 
Norman against the archbishop of 
York, that he took his wife and 
kept her from him. The council 
gave such credit to this, that, as a 
letter was written to that archbishop 
not to come to Parliament, so they 
ordered a letter to be written to Sir 
Thomas Gargrave and Mr. Chaloner 
to examine the matter. What they 
did, or what report they made, does 
not appear to me. Holgate, during 
all the time he was archbishop of 
York, was more set on enriching 
himself than on anything else. He 
seemed heartily to concur in the 
reformation, but he was looked on 
as a reproach to it rather than a 
promoter of it." 

2 2 & 3 Edw. VI. c. 21, sec. 2 : 
" Be it therefore enacted . . . that 
all and every law and laws positive, 



in which it was declared that no human law should 
bar the recognition for the future, as legitimate, of the 
children of priests. There was not much regard had to 
the divine law, for if anything therein seemed to be at 
variance with this declaration, it might be got over by 
a skilful interpretation. 

Then when the Protestants saw that in learning and 
authority their ministers and superintendents were not 
regarded as the equals of the Catholic doctors, they 
sent, with the promise of higher payment, for Bucer, 1 a 
German by birth, and by profession a friar of the Order 
of St. Dominic, and at the same time for Peter Martyr, 2 
a Florentine, and an Augustinian canon, then living at 
Strasburg. Bucer was made professor of theology in 
Cambridge, and Peter Martyr in Oxford, both being 

canons, constitutions, and ordinances, 
made by authority of men only, 
which, do prohibit or forbid marriage 
to any ecclesiastical or spiritual per 
son or persons, . . . shall be utterly 
void and of none effect." But as 
the children born of these marriages 
were not said in the act to be children 
born in wedlock, people regarded 
the marriages with suspicion. Hence 
another act, 5 & 6 Edw. VI. c. 12, 
was passed to make the children 
legitimate, and to silence the cla 
mours of those whom it calls " evil- 
disposed persons, perversely taking 
occasion of certain words and sen 
tences in the same act comprised, 
have and do untruly and very 
slanderously report of priests matri 
mony, saying that the statute is but 
a permission of priests matrimony, 
as usury and other unlawful things 
be now permitted for the eschewing 
of greater inconveniences and evils." 
1 Martin Bucer was by birth an 
Alsatian, born in A.D. 1491, and per 
verted by reading the writings of 
Erasmus. He held the heresy of 
Luther on the Eucharist, but modi 
fied it in many ways, so that lie 

became gradually nearer and nearer 
to Zuinglius and Calvin, but with 
out adopting their more consistent 
heresy. He came to England accom 
panied by Paul Fagius, and was 
received on his arrival by Cranmer in 
Lambeth, April 25, 1549. Original 
Letters, No. 1 59. Bucer had married 
a nun, and was the father of thirteen 
children. Nat. Alexandr., Hist. 
Eccles., ssec. xv. et xvi. c. i. art. ii. 

2 Peter Martyr was born A.D. 1500, 
and is believed to have been per 
verted by reading the works of 
Bucer and Zuinglius. He was 
prior of the house of his order in 
Lucca, from whence he fled to 
Zurich, and settled at Strasburg, 
from which place he came to Eng 
land, invited by the duke of Somer 
set and Cranmer. He arrived in 
England Dec. 20, 1547, bringing 
with him Bernardino Ochino, who 
in the following year was made a 
prebendary of Canterbury. Peter 
Martyr having stayed some time 
with the archbishop, went to Oxford 
as the king s professor of theology, 
and was made a canon of Christ 
Church in 1550. 




[BOOK ii. 

Lutherans when they came to England. 1 Bucer remained 
a Lutheran to the end, and Peter Martyr held the same 
opinions at first, as may be seen in his writings ; for in 
a disputation on the Eucharist, having to reply to the 
Zuinglian argument that Christ is in heaven, and there 
fore not in the Eucharist, he replied that the objection 
came from Satan. Afterwards seeing that the men then 
in power in England were Calvinists, he too went over 
to the opinions of Calvin. 2 

Be this as it may. Whilst he was lecturing in Oxford, 
many demanded of him, and that very frequently, a 
reason for the opinions he taught, and in particular Dr. 

1 Hooper, writing to Bnllinger, 
April 26, 1549 (Original Letters, 30), 
says: " Master a Lasco will soon return 
into England. I greatly regret his 
absence, especially as Peter Martyr 
and Bernardine so stoutly defend 
Lutheranism, and there is now 
arrived a third, I mean Bucer, who 
will leave no stone unturned to ob 
tain a footing. The people of Eng 
land, as I hear, all of them enter 
tain right notions upon that sub 

2 This is confessed by Bucer 
(Gorham s Gleanings, p. 142): "I 
am well assured, however, that he 
[P. Martyr] by no means wished that 
the Supper of the Lord should be 
viewed as a mere administration of 
bread and wine : he acknowledges 
the presence and exhibition of Christ; 
but since the Zurich people have 
here [England] many and great fol- 
lowers,this excellent man was drawn, 
I hardly know how, to use the word 
signification, although he added 
efficacious. " Peter Martyr was 
charged with thus changing his 
opinions by Dr. Smith, and Cran- 
mer (Jenkyns, iii. 12) thus sums up 
the charge as made by Dr. Smith: 
" Peter Martyr at his first coming to 
Oxford, when he was but a Lutheran 
in this matter, taught as Dr. Smyth 
now doth. But when he came once 
to the court, and saw that doctrine 

misliked them that might do him 
hurt in his living, he ever after 
turned his tippet and sang another 
song." Cranrner then says, by way 
of answer : " Of Mr. Peter Martyr 
his opinion and judgment in this 
matter, no man can better testify 
than I. Forasmuch as he lodged 
within my house long before he came 
to Oxford, and I had with him many 
conferences in that matter, and know 
that he was then of the same mind 
that he is now, and as he defended 
after openly in Oxford, and hath 
written in his book." But that is 
not the opinion of others, as may be 
seen in the two foregoing notes. 

John ab Ulmis, writing to Bullinger 
from Oxford, May 10, 1548 (Original 
Letters, 184), says : "He [Martyr] 
has also maintained in like manner 
the cause of the Eucharist and holy 
supper of the Lord, namely, that it 
is a remembrance of Christ, and a 
solemn setting forth of His death, 
and not a sacrifice. Meanwhile, how 
ever, he speaks with caution and pru 
dence, if indeed it can be called such, 
with respect to the real presence, so 
as not to seem to incline either to 
your opinion or to that of Luther." 
John ab Ulmis, who was a Zuinglian 
and friend of Bullinger, would not 
have written in this way if there 
had been no suspicion of Peter 
Martvr in his mind. 



Richard Smith, who before him had sat in the chair in 
which he was then sitting. But he never ventured to 
dispute with them until he secured the presence of 
[Richard] Cox, 1 a heretic about the court, as his 
moderator, and knew that Dr. Smith, a most learned 
and keen disputant, had been driven away from Oxford. 2 
Matters being thus arranged, 3 a disputation touching the 
Eucharist takes place, Peter Martyr defending the heresy 
of Calvin, Drs. Tresham 4 and Chedsey, 5 Catholics, oppos- 

1 Richard Cox, born at Whaddon, 
Bucks, A.D. 1499, educated at Eton 
and in King s College, Cambridge. 
Cardinal Wolsey placed him in the 
college he founded in Oxford, which 
he left for the headmastership of 
Eton. On the expulsion of the 
monks from Ely he was made pre 
bendary of that church, being already 
an archdeacon. Afterwards he was 
made dean of Christ Church, and on 
the death of Longland, bishop of 
Lincoln, May 7, 1547, was elected 
chancellor of the university, " being 
in great favour," says Wood (Fast. 

Oxon., p. 87), "with the then king 

While the said Dr. Cox was chan 
cellor of the university, he enacted 
many things that have been odious 
to posterity." To the deanery of 
Oxford he added that of West 
minster, being also tutor to the king, 
and one of the canons of Windsor. 

2 Wood s Annals, ii. 91. " Smyth 
suspecting that all things would not 
go right 011 his side, that autho 
rity would back Martyr more than 
him, and that some tumult would 
be raised, did prudently abscond 
before the time came." 

3 Wood s Annals, ii. 92. On the 
departure of Smith, Peter Martyr 
put up a notice to this effect : 
" Doctor Smythus, ut in hac notissi- 
mum est academia, ad disputandum 
me publice provocavit. Quod cum 
annuissem et de qusestionibus una 
convenissemus tanturnque expec- 
tandum tempus idoneum, abiisse 

" Cox began with an oration relat 
ing to the business to be taken in 
hand ; that being done, the questions 
that were struck up with Martyr s 
provocation were propounded, as 
they follow: 

" i. In sacramento Eucharistise 
non est panis et vini Transubstantia- 
tio in Corpus et Sanguinem Christi. 

" 2. Corpus et Sanguis Christi non 
snnt corporaliter aut carnaliter in 
pane et vino, neque ut alii dicunt sub 
speciebus panis et vini. 

" 3. Corpus et Sanguis Christi un- 
iuntur pani et vino sacramentaliter." 

4 William Tresham, born in New 
ton, Northamptonshire, became a 
fellow of Merton College A.D. 1515, 
and registrar of the university 1523. 
He defended the divorce, and was 
made one of the canons of the first 
foundation of Christ Church A.D. 
1532, and in 1546 a canon on the 
new foundation. In 1540 he was 
installed prebendary of Lincoln, and 
in 1542 became rector of Bugbrooke, 
where he died A.D. 1569, deprived 
of all his preferments. During his 
residence in Oxford he was twice 
vice-chancellor of the university. 

5 William Chedsey was a Somerset 
shire man, scholar and fellow of 
Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and 
chaplain of Dr. Bonner, bishop of 
London. He obtained the prebend 
of Twyford in St. Paul s in 1548, 
which he exchanged for that of 
Chiswick in 1554, according to 
Tanner, who refers to Bonner s regis 
ter ; but Le Neve is silent. In 1 556 




ing. When three days had been spent in that disputation, 
Cox, the moderator and a Calvinist, seeing Peter Martyr 
more hardly pressed than he expected, and almost driven 
from his chair by the stamping of feet and the clapping of 
hands, said that he had been summoned to London, and 
therefore could no longer remain as moderator in the 
disputation. He spoke highly of Peter Martyr, as if 
he had been victorious in the struggle, and then having 
exhorted the others to lead peaceable lives, brought 
the disputation to a close. 1 The disputation was after- 

he was archdeacon of Middlesex, 
canon of Windsor, canon of Christ 
Church 1557, and in 1558 elected 
president of his college, Corpus 
Christi ; and in 1559 was de 
prived of all he had, Elizabeth being 
queen. After the disputation with 
Peter Martyr, he began to " preach 
openly at Oxford against the steps 
of the Reformation that were made 
and making. Wherefore, March 16 
[1550], he was committed to the 
Marshalsea for seditious preaching, 
where he lay till Nov. n, 1551, and 
then he was ordered to be brought 
to the bishop of Ely s [Goodrich], 
where he enjoyed his table and an 
easier restraint." Strype s Cran- 
mer, bk. ii. chap. 21. "After his 
deprivation of the presidentship, he 
was, for denying the queen s supre 
macy in ecclesiastical matters, clapped 
up in prison, called the Fleet, in 
London, where he died about the 
year 1561." Wood, in the Account 
of Corpus Christi College. 

1 The disputation was begun May 
28, 1 549, and, according to Strype and 
others, lasted four days, and not three, 
as is said in the text. But the state 
ment in the text is supported by the 
confession of Cox himself, who in 
putting an end to the contest on the 
fourth day, said, "Peregimus quatuor 
dimidiates dies in excutiendis du- 
nbus questionibus ;" so that it seems 
he closed the disputation in the begin 
ning of the fourth day, when only 

two out the three questions had been 
discussed. "To whom the laurel 
was given," says Wood (Annals, p. 93), 
" let others judge from their disputa 
tions that are, if true, printed, though 
that of Chedsey is not altogether 
agreeable to the MS. which is in 
Corpus Christi College Library, 
given thereto by him, if I mistake 
not. The Protestant writers say it 
was given to Martyr, the Roman 
Catholic to their party ; and that 
also Dr. Smyth put him to silence 
divers times before he left Oxford. 
The truth is, had not Cox the 
moderator favoured Martyr, and 
helped him at several dead lifts, he 
had been shamefully exposed to the 
scorn of the auditory. But so it 
was that authority backed him, and 
favoured little or nothing the other 
party. Much more I could say of 
this matter, but I forbear, lest I 
seem partial. . . . All that I shall 
say is that such irreverence was 
before and at this time used by the 
generality of the Protestant theolo- 
gists in their disputations, preachings, 
readings, and discourses concerning 
the sacrament of the Body and 
Blood, as also by the vulgar in their 
common talks, rhymes, songs, plays, 
and gestures, which sober and im 
partial men did abhor to hear, that 
an act of Parliament was a little 
before this time made to repress it, 
which being not rightly understood 
by the Academians, or else that they 



wards published by Peter Martyr, but, as is the custom 
of heretics, not honestly. Certainly the university 
regarded him as twice beaten : once when he refused to 
dispute with Dr. Smith, then in this disputation, when 
he could not reply to the arguments of those who dis 
puted with him. A disputation held in Cambridge 
between the theologians of that university and Bucer 
had a like result. 1 

were too nice in the observance of 
it. ... For whereas the sacrament 
was lately delivered unto such com 
municants in a small round wafer 
called commonly sacr amentum al- 
taris, and that such parts thereof 
that were received from time to 
time were hanged over the altar in 
a pyx or box : those zealous ones in 
hatred to the Church of Rome re 
proached it by the odious names of 
* Jack-in-a-box, round-robin/ sa 
crament of the halter/ and other 
names so unbecoming the mouths 
of Christians that they were never 
taken up by theiTurks or infidels," &c. 

1 Foxe (vi. 335) says that the con 
clusions to be disputed were 

" i. The canonical books of Holy 
Scripture alone do sufficiently teach 
the regenerated all things neces 
sarily belonging unto salvation. 

" 2. There is no Church in earth 
which erreth not in manners as well 
as in faith. 

" 3. We are so justified freely of 
God, that before our justification it 
is sin, and provoketh God s wrath 
against us, whatever good work we 
seem to do. Then being justified, 
we do good works." 

( 198 ) 



PUBLIC disputations on the Eucharist, as a sacrifice and 
as a sacrament, were held not only in the Universities 
of Oxford and Cambridge, but in many other places 
also, especially between Hooper, the superintendent of 
Gloucester, and Dr. Feckenham, 1 who excelled in theo 
logical learning ; between Harley, 2 the superintendent 
of Hereford, and Henry Joliffe, 3 a Catholic priest. The 
frivolous objections of Harley were solidly overthrown 
by the bishop of Winchester, to whom the disputation 
was brought when he was in prison. Peter Martyr also 
had gathered together not a few objections against the 
doctrine of the Eucharist, and had written a book iu 
which they were contained; these, too, the bishop re 
futed, and the refutation was published under the name 
of Marcus Constantius, that the real author might not 

1 John Howman was born at on the refounding of Westminster 

Feckenham in Worcestershire, and was made abbot. Queen Elizabeth 

became a Benedictine in the abbey turned him adrift, and shut him up 

of Eveshani. He went from the with the other prisoners in Wis- 

abbey to Gloucester Hall, Oxford, beach Castle, where he died in 1585. 

being then only eighteen years old, 2 John Harley was of Magdalene 

and his studies" completed, returned College, Oxford, bishop of Hereford 

to Eveshani. On the dissolution of in 1553, and expelled the next year ; 

the abbey, 1535, he returned to being a married man. 

Oxford. In 1569 he was one of 3 Henry Joliffe was of Clare Hall, 

Bonner s chaplains. He was often Cambridge, proctor of the university 

imprisoned under Edward VI., and 1536, and prebendary of Worcester 

in the reign of queen Mary was 1 544. He was made dean of Bristol 

made dean of St. Paul s, and then 1554, and died in exile 1573. 



be discovered, and the severities of liis prison be made 
still harder to bear. 

There is also on the same question a learned book by 
Dr. Langdale, 1 who unravelled the captious sophistries 
of Kidley directed at the Eucharist. Must I speak of 
the sermons and the writings of those most grave priests 
Crispin and Moreman, 2 and of their imprisonment also ? 
Of the admirable sermons of Henry Cole, 3 and of his 
long imprisonment borne for the Catholic faith ? Of the 
constancy and the patient endurance of Thomas Watson 4 
before he became bishop of Lincoln, and of his colleague 
Dr. Seton ? 5 

1 Alban Langdale, born iii York 
shire, and educated at St. John s 
College, Cambridge, was made rector 
of Buxted, Sussex, in 1556, being 
then archdeacon of Chichester. He 
was deprived of all he had under 
queen Elizabeth. The book is 
" Confutatio Catholica Nicolai Rid- 
laei determinations de Eucharistia. 
Paris, 1556." 

2 Cranmer, in his answer to the 
eleventh demand of the Devonshire 
insurgents in 1549, thus speaks of 
these priests : " And to declare to 
you plainly the qualities of Crispin 
and Moreman, and how unmeet they 
be to be your teachers, they be per 
sons very ignorant in God s Word, 
and yet thereto very wilful, crafty, 
and full of dissimulation. For if 
they were profoundly learned, and 
of sincere judgments, as they be 
not, they might be godly teachers 
of you." Moreman was one of the 
disputants in convocation, A.D. 1553, 
against Philpot. 

3 Henry Cole, born at Godshill, 
Isle of Wight, educated in Win 
chester school, whence he proceeded 
to New College, Oxford, being ad 
mitted fellow of the house 1523. 
He went to Italy to perfect himself 
in civil law, and on his return, 1540, 
practised in the Court of Arches, 
being made a prebendary of St. 
Paul s. He was elected warden of 

New College, Oct. 4, 1542, having 
been ordained deacon in the be 
ginning of that year ; then rector 
of Newton Longville. He had fav 
oured the Reformation during the 
lifetime of Henry VIII., but on the 
accession of Edward VI. resigned 
all his preferments. On the acces 
sion of queen Mary he was made 
archdeacon of Ely 1553, dean of St. 
Paul s, London, 1556, and in the 
next year vicar-general of Cardinal 
Pole, archbishop of Canterbury. He 
preached the sermon at the burning 
of Cranmer, and on the accession of 
Elizabeth was deprived of all his 
benefices, imprisoned first in the 
Tower, and then in the Fleet, where 
he died Feb. 4, 1579, in the eighty- 
seventh year of his age. 

4 Thomas Watson, master of St. 
John s College, Cambridge, Sept. 28, 
1553; dean of Durham, Nov. 18, 
in the same year. In 1557 he was 
made bishop of Lincoln, from which 
see he was driven by Elizabeth, June 
25, 1 559, and made a prisoner first in 
London, then in Wisbeach Castle, 
where he died Sept. 27, 1584. His 
sermons on the seven sacraments, 
with a biographical notice, have been 
recently edited by the Rev. T. E. 
Bridgett, of the Congregation of the 
Most Holy Redeemer. 

5 John Seton or Seyton was of 
St. John s College, Cambridge, and 



[BOOK ii. 

Time would fail me if I were to speak by name of all 
those who in these days, on account of the Catholic faith, 
were driven out of their benefices or their colleges, and 
then were made to suffer the more grievous pains of 
bonds and imprisonment. John Storey, 1 a doctor of 

one of the chaplains of Gardiner, 
and made a prebendary of Win 
chester 1553. 

1 John Storey was educated in 
Hinksey Hall, Oxford, and in 1537 
-was principal of Broadgates Hall. 
He was vicar-general of Bonner 
1539, sitting also in the House of 
Commons. Soon after uttering the 
words in the text in his place in 
Parliament, he fled the country, but 
returned in the reign of Mary, and, 
according to Tanner, was made chan 
cellor of London. When Elizabeth 
came to the throne, his life and lib 
erty were threatened. Parkhurst, 
the Protestant bishop of Norwich, 
writing to Bullinger, May 31, 1562 
(Zurich Letters, No. 48), says, 
" Story, that little man of law, and 
most impudent Papist, has been ar 
rested, as I understand, in the west 
of England, in his barrister s 
robes. " The words of Parkhurst are 
" more aulico," and according to the 
" Declaration of the Life and Death 
of John Story, London, 1571," he 
was "taken in the west country 
riding before a mail in a frieze coat 
like a serving man, and was appre 
hended in the highway by one Mr. 
Ayleworth, one of the queen s ser 
vants," and sent to prison. He made 
liis escape, however, and went to 
Louvain with his wife and children. 
But he was soon troubled with many 
fears, for he thought he had done 
wrong in escaping from death, 
whereby he lost the crown of mar 
tyrdom. He wanted much to re 
turn, and consulted Dr. Sander, 
who, however, would not take it 
upon himself to advise or sanction 
Ids return. The greater part of his 
time he now spent in the Carthu 
sian monastery, and if his wife had 
consented, would have entered re 

ligion. Some of his kindred made 
their escape from England and came 
to him, who was already poor, hav 
ing lost all he had, and he knew not 
what to do to provide for himself, 
his wife, children, and grandchil 
dren. He was then offered the place 
of searcher of ships, and though his 
friends dissuaded him from un 
dertaking that employment, unfit 
ting him, his poverty prevailed. 
The merchants who traded in con 
traband goods, finding their gains 
lessened, determined to be revenged ; 
and they suborned one of his friends, 
who deceived him and inveigled 
him on board a ship ready to sail. 
** After he had entered the ship," 
writes Horn to Bullinger (Zurich 
Letters, No. 98, ist series), "and 
was prying about in every corner, 
and had just gone down into the in 
terior of the vessel, they suddenly 
closed the hatches " and sailed for 
England. He was then placed in 
the Lollard s tower, and afterwards 
lodged in the Tower. May 26, 1571, 
he was arraigned in Westminster 
Hall. He declined to plead or de 
fend himself, beyond saying that he 
was not a subject of the queen. The 
judges condemned him to death, 
and the night before his martyrdom 
he was allowed to have Dr. Fecken- 
ham, the abbot of Westminster, with 
him. June ist he was drawn on a 
hurdle to Tyburn from the Tower, 
where he was hung, drawn, and 
quartered because he would not ac 
knowledge thesupreniacy of Elizabeth 
and deny the supremacy of the Pope. 
Cecil, the earl of Bedford, and Lord 
Hunsdon were present at the mar 
tyrdom. " His head/ says Stow, p. 
669, " set on London Bridge, and 
his quarters on the gates of the 



canon and civil law, went into exile because, while 
speaking in Parliament in defence of the faith, he ven 
tured at last to repeat the words of Solomon, 1 " Woe to 
thee, land, whose king is a child." 

An Italian, Antony Bonwise, 2 lived in England, a 
great merchant, great not only in his wealth, but much 
more so in his reputation as a man of integrity and 
honour. He had always had a great respect for Sir 
Thomas More ; and now, seeing even the traces of the 
Catholic faith being removed from England, went to 
live in the University of Louvain, not indeed to carry 
on his business as a merchant of this world, but to 
attend to the business of the next. Louvain was then 
the nearest harbour of the faith to which Englishmen 
driven out for the faith might run for refuge. There 
he gathered around him and comforted those who were 
in exile for the faith, especially the physician John 
Clement 3 and his wife, John Storey, and that great 
light of all England, Nicholas Harpsfield, 4 who after- 

1 Eccles. x. 1 6. 

2 Antonio Buonvisi was, accord 
ing to Dod (vol. i. p. 201), " a native 
of Lucca, who resided several years 
in London, where he assisted Sir 
Thomas More with many conveni 
ences while he was prisoner." 

3 John Clement, educated at Ox 
ford, was tutor to the children of 
Sir Thomas More. He returned to 
Oxford about A.D. 1519, and was 
professor of Greek on the founda 
tion of Cardinal "VVolsey, and ap 
plied himself later to medicine, and 
was a fellow of the College of Physi 
cians in London. He went abroad 
in the reign of king Edward, return 
ing under Mary, when he practised 
medicine in Essex, and finally into 
exile on the accession of Elizabeth. 
He had married Margaret, brought 
up by Sir Thomas More with his 
own children, and died in Mechlin 
July i, 1572, nearly two years after 

his wife, who went to her rest July 
6, 1570. He once complained to 
Dr. Stokesley, bishop of London, of 
the corruption into which men had 
sunk. The answer of the bishop 
was," Vendidimus primogenita" (" we 
have sold the right of our primo 
geniture "), " meaning," says Harps- 
lield (Treatise of Marriage, bk. iii. p. 
1 36, Eyston MS. ), " of the removing of 
the obedience of the See Apostolic." 
4 Nicholas Harpsfield, born in 
London, educated at Winchester and 
New College, Oxford, of which house 
he became a fellow A.D. 1535; prin 
cipal of White Hall, 1544; professor 
of Greek, 1 546 ; in exile for the faith 
during the reign of Edward VI. 
He returned A.D. 1553, took his de 
gree of doctor of laws, and practised 
in the Court of Arches. Archdeacon 
of Canterbury 1554, being then a 
prebendary of St. Paul s ; judge in 
the Court of Arches, dean of the 



[BOOK ii. 

wards in the reign of Elizabeth suffered a lengthened 
imprisonment ; also John Boxall, 1 a man of great learn 
ing and honour, and the lawyer, William Bastall/ 2 with 
his wife, who died in Louvain. 

Eeginald, Cardinal Pole, was then living in Kome 
hope of England, glory of the Koman Church, and light 
of Christendom. He had written four books, full of 
learning, in defence of the unity of the Church, and 
addressed them to Henry VIII. Not reaping therefrom 
the fruit he expected, he wrote a fifth book, 3 addressed 
to Edward VI., king of England, for he would leave 
nothing undone that he considered to be for the welfare 
of his country. After the death of Paul III., who had 
made him a cardinal, he might have been elected to the 
sovereign Pontificate if he had desired that great dig 
nity, for nearly two-thirds of the votes were given him ; 4 
but he chose to forego that high eminence, chiefly for 
the sake of gaining the more abundant merit of not 
seeking it, and that he might reserve himself for the 
task of restoring his most cherished country, by his per- 

peculiars of Canterbury, 1558. On 
the death of Mary he refused to ac 
knowledge the supremacy of the 
crown, and was thrown into prison, 
wherein he was kept for more than 
twenty years, released, not by the 
queen, but by death, in 1583. 

1 John Boxall, a member of queen 
Mary s council, dean of Peter 
borough, Norwich, and Windsor. 
"On the 4th of March, Boxall, a 
notorious Papist and secretary to 
queen Mary, died at Lambeth." 
Parkhurst s Letter to Bullinger, 
Aug. 10, 1571 ; Zurich Letters, No. 
99, ist Series. 

2 William Rastall, a nephew of 
Sir Thomas More, whose sister was 
his mother ; his wife was Winifred, 
daughter of John Clement. She 
died in Louvain at the end of his 

first exile, July 7, 1553. He re 
turned to England, and was one of 
the judges under queen Mary. He 
went into exile again under Eliza 
beth, and died at Louvain, aged 
fifty-seven, Aug. 27, 1565. 

3 Reginald! Poli, Cardinalis Bri- 
tanni, Epistola ad Edw. VI., AnglicQ 
regem. Printed by Schelhorn in his 
" Amoenitates Ecclesiastics, " vol. i., 
and in the " Bibliographia Critica " 
of Fr. Michael de St. Joseph, vol. iv. 
p. 24. 

4 Vita Eeginaldi Poli, p. 21. 
Tenet., 1563. "De eo cum suffragia 
recenserentur, inventa sunt xxviii. 
atque in his Gallorum duo qu<# 
ilium Pontificem Max. declararent, 
ita ut ad Pontificatum consequen- 
dum duo onmino deessent. Id Polo 
magnse voluptati fuit." 



sonal labours, to the unity of the Church. 1 Eichard 
Pate, 2 also, bishop of Worcester, lived in Rome, as 
did Thomas Goldwell, 3 now bishop of St. Asaph, and 
Maurice Clenock, 4 afterwards bishop elect of Bangor. 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, 
bk. iii. p. 133, Eyston MS. " I add 
here that the great integrity and 
modesty of the said Cardinal, free 
from all importunate ambition of 
all worldly honour, wherewith the 
other prelate [Cranmer] was over 
whelmed and drowned, is otherwise 
also more notable, as of one that 
refused the very high and supreme 
dignity of the Papacy of Rome, 
whereto he was by the Cardinals 
lawfully elected, for whose consent 
they stayed their election of any 
other person two whole months, a 
thing that was never read or heard 
of, I trow, before in any Pope s 
election, and yet could they not 
win his consent. This thing as it is 
of itself most notable, so it should 
be to us Englishmen most comfort 
able. For unless I be greatly de- 
deceived, one of the greatest causes 
of his refusal proceeded from the 
fatherly tender love he bore to this 
his native country, whose reforma 
tion he desired of all other things, 
and would reserve himself free, if 
ever God did send a meet time, to 
help forward in his own person that 
holy work and business of our re 
formation, whereof it seemed he was 
not without hope, but looked and 
longed for it, and hoped to be a 
worker therein." 

2 Richard Pate. Godwin (De 
Prsesulibus Angl., p. 470) says that 
Pate was made bishop of Worcester 
in 1534, and that he was sent abroad 
on an embassy, and never returned 
to take possession of the see he had 
accepted. Wharton says nothing of 
this. Neither Stubbs nor Godwin 

fives the date of his consecration, 
trype in his Mem., iii. i. 257, 
writes thus : " This Pate had lived 
abroad many years, and had long 
been attainted under king Henry 

VIII. for taking the bishopric of 
Worcester from the Pope. He had 
holden a secret correspondence with 
the Pope, and was excepted out of 
the last general pardon under king 
Edward VI. But now [A.D. 1554] 
his attaint was taken off, and he 
restored to his see of Worcester, 
long since bestowed on him by the 
Pope, but never enjoyed till now." 
He was made bishop of Worcester in 
July 1 54 1, and was at Trent in 1552, 
taking his place, according to his 
consecration, between the bishop of 
Syracuse and the bishop of Stras- 
burg, as is shown by Nicholas 
Pseaume, bishop of Verdun "Hugo, 
sacrce Antiquitatis Monumenta," p. 
323. His name is disfigured there by 
the copyist into "Richardus Palus, 
episcopus Wormiensis." 

3 Thomas Goldwell, born in Kent 
about 1500, and educated at All 
Souls College, Oxford, rector of 
Cheriton, near Canterbury, 1531. 
He left England in the beginning of 
the schism and entered the family 
of Cardinal Pole, where he was for a 
time, and then became a Theatine. 
He came back on the accession of 
Mary, and was made bishop of St. 
Asaph. On the accession of Eliza 
beth he went again into exile, re 
turned to Rome, where he lived in 
great honour and veneration till his 
death, April 3, 1585, the last of the 
bishops of England. See the ac 
count of his life by the Rev. Fr. 
Knox, D.D., of the London Oratory. 

4 Maurice Clenock, born in 
Wales, educated in the University of 
Oxford, " where he chiefly applied 
himself to the canon law, and was 
about six years professor in that fa 
culty ; at the same time a progress 
in divinity and proceeding doctor. 
In queen Mary s reign he was a pre 
bendary of York, almoner and sec- 


Towards the end of the fourth year of the reign of 
Edward VI, on the i;th day of December [1550], the 
tide in the Thames, departing from the natural course, 
rose and fell three times within the space of nine hours. 1 
People regarded it as a portent, and connected it with 
the unjust harassing of Stephen bishop of Winchester, 2 
especially as he was taken then by water, when that 
unusual tide occurred, to make his defence of the faith. 
Be that, however, as it may, Gardiner, who had reso 
lutely spoken everywhere in defence of the faith, was a 
month or two afterwards deprived of his see, and a 
Calvinist, Poynet by name, translated from Eochester, 
was put in his place. 

retary to Cardinal Pool, as also chan- the Tower, from which he was taken 
cellor of the Prerogative Court of to the court in Lambeth Palace, in 
Canterbury. Upon the decease of which sat as commissioners of the 
William Glyn, bishop of Bangor, king, Cranmer, Ridley, Thirlby 
who died in "May 1558, Dr. Clenock bishop of Ely, Holbeach bishop of 
was nominated by the queen his Lincoln, Sir William Petre, Sir 
successor, but was never consecrated. James Hales of the Court of Corn- 
After queen Elizabeth ascended the nion Pleas, Dr. Griffith Leyson, 
throne, he was obliged to surrender Dr. John Oliver, Richard Goodrich 
all his preferments, for refusing to and John Gosnold, Esquires. They 
comply with the court measures." opened their court Dec. 15, 1550, 
Dod, Church Hist., vol. i. p. 513. and sat till Saturday, Feb. 14, 1551. 

1 Greyfriars Chronicle : " The On that day, in their twenty-second 
15th day of December 1550 was session, they sentenced him to the 
brought from the Tower of London loss of his bishopric notwithstand- 
iinto Lambeth the bishop of Win- ing his formal appeal " to the king s 
Chester, then being Dr. Stephen majesty " made before they pro- 
Gardiner, . . . and the i8th day nounced their decision "byautho- 
following, tlrither again, and that rity of a commission by the high 
same day was two tides at London and mighty prince, our most gracious 
Bridge within the space of five sovereign lord Edward VI., king of 
hours." The Chronological His- England, France, and Ireland, de- 
torian, by W. Toone, Esq., i. 163: fender of the faith, and of the Church 
" The Thames ebbed and flowed of England and also of Ireland, in 
three times in nine hours below the earth the supreme head." Foxe, 
bridge." Acts and Monuments, vi. ed. Cattley, 

2 The bishop was a prisoner in contains a full report of the process. 

( 205 ) 



IN the fifth year of king Edward, by a public proclama 
tion, July Qth [1551], the silver coin throughout Eng 
land was lessened one-fourth in value, and forty days 
afterwards another fourth part was taken away from the 
value of all the silver coin current. Henceforward every 
pound in silver was to pass for half the former value, 
every shilling and every penny to pass current as if they 
were coins of sixpence and one halfpenny. Thus a man 
to-day possessed of one hundred pounds in money lost 
fifty pounds in forty days, though he had not suffered 
shipwreck, though he had not been taken by the enemy 
and robbed, and though no person whatsoever had 
cheated him. 1 Such taxation was never made before, 
namely, that every man without exception should pay 
the half of all the money he had in his possession. The 
people, indeed, never imagined that they were paying 
more than one-half, when, meanwhile, they were in 
reality paying to the last farthing, and therefore paying 
even more than the whole. 

For the right understanding of this matter we must 
keep in mind that after the beginning of the schism 

1 Edward VI. in his journal (Bur- August . . . the teston was again 

net, v. 41) says, under July 9, " Pro- cried down from ninepence to six- 

clamation made that a testorn should pence, the groat from threepence to 

go at 9d. and a groat at 3d. in all twopence, and the twopence to a 

places of the realm at once." Strype penny, the penny to an halfpenny, 

(Memorials, ii. i. 486) adds, " And in and the halfpenny to a farthing." 


Henry VIII. began to turn into dross the silver money 
of pure coinage. Then they who made the schism of 
Henry still more grievous, lowered continually the in 
trinsic value of the coin till at last there were hardly 
more than two parts of silver left, instead of twelve. 
Again, as it became impossible to issue money that was 
more worthless and more debased, when the people had 
paid their money according to one price, and when they 
should have received that money back again at the same 
price, lo ! a proclamation is made that they are to receive 
what they had paid only at half the former value. Cer 
tain coins, too, of the king, issued at a certain value, 
were taken, some at one -fourth, others at one-sixth of 
that first value. He who will take all these frauds into 
account will easily see that the English people were 
robbed more than once in the course of a few years of 
all their money. 1 

To this was added intolerable extortions by the more 
powerful everywhere ; these people, foreseeing the com 
ing depreciation of the coin they were the advisers of it 
paid their debts to their creditors, and their wages to 
their servants, and bought estates, paying for them in 
money one day which they knew would on the morrow 
be current for less than one-fourth its nominal value. 
All these wrong-doings God, in His infinite mercy, per 
mitted, that the people might learn even in this way 
what unjust stewards of the grace of God and of His 
heavenly gifts they must be who could not honestly ad 
minister their temporal affairs. The words of truth are, 
" He who is unjust in little, is unjust also in the greater. 
If then you have not been faithful in the unjust mam- 

1 Hooper, writing to Bullinger, coined under the late king ; but 

April 8, 1549 (Original Letters, what is increased in one way is 

28), says, " A new gold coinage is diminished in another, for the stan- 

now being struck in England of a dard weight of the crowns is dimin- 

purer standard than that which was ished by nearly a fourth part." 

CHAP. V.] 



mon, who will trust you with the true ? " The truth 
taught in the gospel, then, is this : they who so wickedly 
cheated the people in worldly things never could be true 
and faithful stewards of the mysteries of God. And yet 
these were they who had the sovereign direction of 
sacred things ; we must, therefore, not be surprised if 
they taught the people heresy instead of the Catholic 

In the same year [1551] a certain disease, called the 
sweating sickness, raged in England ; in the city of Lon 
don alone eight hundred persons died of it within a week, 2 
and many thousands throughout the country. Ford, 3 
the second master of Winchester school, perverted 
Joliffe, the head boy, and made him a Calvinistic heretic. 
He in his turn brought over the other boys, for the 

1 St. Luke xvi. 10, n. 

2 Burcher, writing to Bullinger, 
An g- 3, I55 1 (Original Letters, 321), 
says, " A pestilence called the sweat 
ing sickness has been prevalent in 
London. More than nine hundred 
died in one week." " It grew so 
much," says Edward VI. (Burnet, v. 
41), "for in London the loth day 
there died 70 in the liberties, and 
this day [July n] 120." Heylyn 
(Hist. Ref., p. no, ed. 1661) says, 
" And that which was most strange 
of all, no foreigner which was then 
in England four hundred French 
attending here, in the hottest of it, 
on that king s ambassadors did 
perish by it : the English being 
singled out tainted and dying of it, 
in all other countries, without any 
danger to the natives." Stow (p. 
605) says, " This sickness followed 
Englishmen as well within the realm 
as in strange countries, wherefore 
this nation was much afeared of it, 
and for the time began to repent and 
remember God, but as the disease 
relented the devotion decayed. The 
first week died in London 800 

3 Strype (Memorials, iii. i. 276), 

" Mr. William Ford, sometime 
scholar, and after usher of Wick- 
ham College beside Winchester," he 
was supposed to be a destroyer of 
images as early as 1535 or 1536. 

Prevarication of the Holy Church s 
Liberties, chap. iv. s. 21, Eyston MS. 
" One Ford had infected one Jolife, 
a forward young man in Winchester 
College, with Calvinism, and Jolife 
spread his infection of heresy to 
others. But Jolife, with all those 
that adhered to him, were as it was 
then noted taken away with the 
sweating sickness, and such others as 
were converted from their errors by 
one White, a devout and religious 
man, all which, nevertheless, the 
statists had not the grace to make 
use of, for Dudley earl of Warwick, 
during the commitments of the pro 
tector, had said to Sir Antony 
Brown, afterwards Viscount Mount- 
acute, moving him amongst others 
for the restoration of Catholic re 
ligion, that albeit he knew the 
Roman religion to be the true reli 
gion, yet seeing a new religion was 
begun, run dog, run devil, he would 
go forward." 



[BOOK ii. 

most part, to his opinion. God visited this Joliffe and 
others, some of whom were of kin to him, and the rest 
his friends, and brought this sickness upon them. Then 
He brought them to salutary penance through the 
preaching of that most saintly man John White, 1 and 
soon after took them away by death. All the other 
boys, nearly two hundred in number, were either con 
verted to the Catholic faith or so strengthened therein, 
that in after-life, by telling the story of this divine 
visitation, they brought many others back from the 
heresy of Calvin to the unity of the Catholic Church. 

Poynet, 2 in possession of the see of Winchester, though 
he wished to be considered a bishop, thought it a little 
matter to take a wife ; so he took away from her husband 
the wife of a butcher 3 who was still living, and who by 

1 John White, born in Fornham, 
educated at Winchester and New 
College, Oxford, of which he became 
a fellow in 1527. He was made 
head-master of Winchester in 1534, 
and soon after warden ; bishop of 
Lincoln in 1554, and in 1556 trans 
lated to Winchester, from which see 
he was driven by Elizabeth, 1559. 
He preached the sermon at the 
burial of queen Mary, and in doing 
so, says Sir John Harington (Brief e 
View, &c., p. 60, ed. 1653), "fell 
into such an unfeigned weeping that 
for a long space he could not speak." 
He died at South Warnborough, 
Jan. ii, 1560. 

2 John Poynet or Ponet was 
born in Kent and educated at Cam 
bridge. He was one of Cranmer s 
chaplains, who gave him the benefice 
of St. Michael, Crooked Lane, Lon 
don. He held also the vicarage of 
Ashford, the rectory of Towyn, 
Merionethshire, and a canonry in 
Canterbury, all of which he kept, 
with the bishopric of Rochester, 
which Edward VI. gave him in 
1550. On the deprivation of Gar 
diner in that year the king gave 

him Winchester, but only in name, 
for, according to Strype (Mem., ii. 
ii. 1 66), he had but "2000 marks 
a year settled upon him : the rest of 
the temporalities of this rich bishop 
ric was taken into the king s hands, 
who bestowed most of the good 
manors and lands thereof upon 
several of his courtiers." Ponet was 
in the rebellion of Wyatt, but seeing 
that it was failing, "he took his 
leave" (says Stow, p. 620) "of his 
secret friends, and said he would 
pray unto God for their good success, 
and so did depart, and went into 
Germany, where he died." He is 
said to have died at Strasburg, 
Aug. n, 1556. 

3 Chron. of the Greyfriars, p. 
70, ed. Camden Society. " And the 
xxvii. day of the same monyth [July 
1551] the byshoppe of Wynchesteu 
that was than, was devorsyd from 
hys wyffe in Po wiles, the whyche 
was a bucheres wyff of Nottynggam, 
and gave here husband a sartyne 
mony a yere dureynge hys lyffe as it 
was jugydde by the law." See also 

Machyn s Diary, p. 8. Burnet (v. 
603, ed. Pocock) charges Sander 




process of law obtained restitution of her. Some time 
afterwards a nobleman speaking to Gardiner, partly in 
jest and partly in mockery, said, " Perhaps you expect 
some day to recover your bishopric." Gardiner replied, 
" Why should I not expect ? the butcher has recovered 
his wife." Gardiner s bishopric and the butcher s wife 
had been taken possession of by one and the same man. 
There was also another false prophet, in bad odour 
not only for his hypocrisy, but for his heresy as well. 
When he was but a private person he used to slander 
the Catholic bishops, 1 reproaching them with the state 
they kept, and their possession of too abundant riches. 2 
He, made a superintendent 3 for so these Calvinists 
call by a Latin name those whom our forefathers, 
using a Greek word, called bishops 4 took to himself 
two bishoprics at once, the sees of Gloucester and of 
Worcester. 5 

with the inventing of this story, and 
calls it a "forgery." Ponet is the 
author of the Short Catechism pub 
lished in the reign of Edward VI. in 
Latin and in English, and ordered 
by the king to be used, having been 
" written," says the king, " by a 
certain godly and learned man." 
The Catechism has been reprinted 
in the volume of " The Two Litur 
gies," by the Parker Society. 

1 Micronius to Bullinger, May 29, 
1559 (Original Letters, 260) : " Only 
he stirred up some lazy noblemen 
and bishops against himself, espe 
cially because he exhorted the king 
and council to a more complete 
reformation of the Church." 

2 Micronius, writing from London, 
Aug. 14, 1551, to Bullinger (Original 
Letters, 265), says of Hooper : " I 
pray you to exert your influence in 
recommending to him meekness and 
gentleness. Exhort Mistress Anna, 
his wife, not to entangle herself 
with the cares of this life. Let her 
beware of the thorns by which the 
word of God is choked. It is a most 

dangerous thing for one who is in the 
service of Christ to hunt after riches 
and honours. Your admonitions will 
have much weight with them both." 

3 Christopher Hales, writing from 
London to Rodolph Gualter, May 24, 
1550 (Original Letters, 99), says, 
" Hooper was made bishop of Glou 
cester two days since, but under 
godly conditions, for he will not 
allow himself to be called Eabbi, or 
my lord, as we are wont to say ; he 
refuses to receive the tonsure, he re 
fuses to become a pie, and to be 
consecrated and anointed in the 
usual way." 

4 Strype, Memorials, ii. ii. 141. 
" The bishops had exercised so much 
dominion and rigour, and been such 
"Papalins," that the very name of 
bishop grew odious among the people, 
and the word superintendent began 
to be affected and come in the room ; 
and the rather, perhaps, being a 
word used in the Protestant churches 
of Germany. This the Papists made 
sport with." 

5 The bishopric of Worcester was 




Miles Coverclale 1 also, after a long residence in Ger 
many, returned to England, drunk bodily through his 
intemperate indulgence in wine, and mentally through 
his excessive affection to heresy. The man hearing that 
the University of Oxford was earnestly devoted to the 
Catholic faith, and unwillingly giving way to heresy, 
went to Oxford. 2 promising himself great things, and 
purposing to bring about the perversion of many. He 
mounted the pulpit and told the people, expecting won 
drous things, that he was about to speak on the very 
gravest of questions the Sacrament of the Altar. He 
began by saying that he was one in whom they could 

by far the better endowed, but 
Hooper obtained a royal dispensation, 
on taking possession of Worcester, 
to hold Gloucester in commendam ; 
and Foxe (vi. 643) defends the pro 
cess by saying that Hooper "so 
ruled and guided either of them, 
and both together, as though he had 
in charge but one family." 

1 Miles Coverdale was born in the 
parish of Coverliam, in the North 
Hiding of Yorkshire, and entered 
the Augustinian House, Cambridge, 
of which Barnes, burned at Smith- 
field A.D. 1 540, was afterwards prior. 
He employed himself mucli in trans 
lating file Scriptures, and was after 
wards diligent in the service of 
Cromwell searching out the priests 
who had not mutilated the Breviary 
and the Missal by blotting out the 
names of St. Thomas of Canterbury 
and of the Pope. On the death of 
Cromwell he fled the country, 
and kept a school in Bergzabern, 
and married. He returned in the 
reign of Edward VI., and was made 
one of the royal chaplains. He 
accompanied the troops sent down 
to Devonshire, when the people rose 
in defence of the faith, and became 
vicar-general of the bishop of Exeter. 
The bishop soon after resigned, and 
Coverdale was put in his place. In. 
the reign of Marv he was ordered 

into prison, but the king of Den 
mark interceded for him, and he was 
allowed to go abroad. John Macbee, 
aScotch preacher in Denmark, having 
married a sister of Coverdale s wife, 
had prevailed upon the king to inter 
pose his good offices on his behalf. 
On the accession of Elizabeth he 
returned again, and was employed 
in the consecration of Parker, but 
never readmitted to be a bishop. 
He accepted the benefice of St. 
Magnus, London Bridge, and died 
in Feb. 1569, aged eighty-one. On 
his being made bishop of Exeter, he 
received from Edward VI. a licence 
to preach, and also a licence to him 
"and Elizabeth his wife, during 
their lives, with five or six at their 
table, to eat flesh and white meats 
in Lent and on other fasting days." 
Strype, Memorials, ii. ii. 266. See 
Bymer, Foedera, vi. iii. 214. 

2 Peter Martyr, writing to Bul- 
linger from Oxford, April 25, 1551 
(Original Letters, No. 232), says that 
Hooper " was here with me at 
Oxford three days before Easter, 
together with Michael Coverdale, 
a most effective preacher, and one 
who deserves well of the gospel. 
Both of them preached to our people 
at Oxford, and attended my public 
exposition of the Epistle to the 


rightly place the utmost confidence touching this con 
troversy. He knew, he said, that the Catholics believed 
in transubstantiation, that the Lutherans taught the im- 
panation of Christ, that the Zuinglians held the sacra 
ment to be but a type and figure of Christ, and that 
Calvin allowed it to be only a certain virtue and power ; 
but he, Coverdale, putting all human authority on one 
side, divesting himself of every prejudice, and following 
no party, had for fourteen years seriously examined the 
matter, not in the light of human tradition, but in that 
of the Divine writings alone. 

Gravely uttering this, he seemed to think himself a 
wise man ; others thought him silly ; the more learned, 
however, thought he was mad. Now, as the sensual 
man does not understand the things of the Spirit of 
God, 1 and as that which reveals to us the things that 
are not seen is the one faith of Jesus Christ, 2 which 
faith is by hearing hearing by the word of Christ, 3 not 
the word read only, but the word openly preached, 
which has gone forth into every land and as the 
mystery of the Eucharist is the most spoken of, is every 
day present to the faithful, as it were in their hands 
and in their mouths, it must be granted that the man 
who confesses that he has cast away the Catholic faith 
preached and believed in the house of God, who has 
been fourteen years without a definite belief in that 
mystery, and who has therefore been all that time an 
unbelieving infidel, must be like a madman if he asks 
people to believe what he says on the ground that he 
has been without belief himself. 

St. Paul, it is true, says that the Scriptures can in 
struct unto salvation ; 4 but how ? He answers, by the 
faith which is in Christ, for otherwise the Jews imagined 
that they had life in the Scriptures. But because they 

1 i Cor. ii. 14. 2 Heb. xi. i. 3 Rom. x. 17. 4 2 Tim. iii. 15. 


had not the faith of Christ, their table, whereat they 
thought they were feeding on the Scriptures, became a 
snare before them. 1 Yea, that is the true reason why no 
heretic can understand the sacred writings ; for while he 
is searching the Scriptures for the purpose of ascertain 
ing what he is to believe, he is not in possession of the 
faith he is seeking, nor without the faith has he the 
understanding of the Scriptures. Hence it conies to 
pass that such a one ruins himself and those who listen 
to him. 2 

When, then, the Catholic doctors and priests spoke 
in this way, and reminded others of the truth, the 
Catholic faith was so advanced in the University of 
Oxford that men were found there who by speaking 
and writing denied openly the ecclesiastical supremacy 
of Edward VI. How could he be the supreme head and 
governor of the Church of England? he who was but 
a boy, differing in nothing from a servant, a child in 
understanding and judgment, in civil matters necessarily 
under a guardian. 3 Christ gave His Church to be fed 
and ordered not by children but by men, and then not 
by every man, but by men who can rightly " exhort in 
sound doctrine, and reprove them that gainsay it." 

Among those who thus thought there were two men 
who deserve to be remembered : one was Gilbert Lever, 5 
a man almost illiterate, he went to prison rather than 
take the oath of supremacy to a boy ; the other was in 
}^ears a youth, but in courage an old man Eichard 
Brittain, 6 he maintained, not by word of mouth only, that 

1 Psalm Ixviii. 23. bert Lever, Richard Brittain, and 

2 2 Tim. ii. 14. other Oxonians, for preaching and 

3 Gal. iv. i ; I Cor. xiv. 20. writing against the supremacy and 

4 Tit. i. 9. proving the authority of the Pope 

5 In the margin, " Who to this by the testimony of all the ancient 
<lay has much to suffer for the fathers : some of them were con- 
atholic religion." demned, others committed." 

Prevarication, chap. iv. s. 20. "Gil- 6 Richard Brittain was of New 

CHAP. V.] 


2I 3 

the Eoman Pontiff, as the successor of St. Peter, is the 
sovereign head of the whole Church, and in that dignity 
the sole Vicar of Christ, but also by writings, which he 
presented to his judge, proving his faith and confirming 
it by the testimony of the Scriptures and the ancient 
fathers. And he, too, was kept in prison for the sake 
of Christ. 

Ed ward Seymour the protector, the chief leader of the 
Calvinists also, who had put his own brother to death, 1 
is now for the second time sent to prison, and his wife 
with him ; 2 he was charged with an attempt on the life 
of John Dudley, formerly earl of Warwick, but at this 
time duke of Northumberland. 3 It is said that the duke 

College, Oxford, and at the age of 
twenty-four, by reading Catholic 
books, recovered the faith, and de 
fended the authority of the Pope. 
He was tried, and at his trial con 
fessed more amply still, for which 
he was sent to prison. His only 
food was bread, to which on feast 
days he added a little broth. His 
great austerities and constancy in 
the faith won others over among 
whom Sander was one who visited 
him in prison, and resolved, if the 
opportunity arose, to contend for the 
faith as he had done. He obtained 
his liberty on the accession of Mary, 
and not long afterwards died in the 
Order of St. Francis. 

1 Francis Bourgoyne, writing to 
Calvin from London, Jan. 22, 1552 
(Original Letters, No. 347), says, 
" It was notorious to every one in 
this kingdom that he was the occa 
sion of his brother s death, who 
having been convicted on a charge 
of treason which no one could prove 
against him by legal evidence, and 
of which when brought to execu 
tion he perseveringly denied the 
truth, was beheaded owing to his 
information, instigated by I know 
not what hatred and rivalry against 
his brother." 

2 Micronius, writing to Bullinger 

from London, Nov. 7, 1551 (Original 
Letters, No. 266), says, " The dis 
turbance which suddenly took place 
here on the second imprisonment of 
the duke of Somerset, his wife, and 
other noble persons, greatly dis 
tressed our minds." He was sent 
to the Tower, according to Strype 
(Memorials, ii. i. 497), on the I5th 
day of October. 

3 Micronius, writing to Bullinger, 
March 9, 1552 (Original Letters, No. 
267), says : " Various grounds have 
been assigned for this procedure. 
The real cause, however, as I under 
stand from persons worthy of credit, 
was his having formed a conspiracy 
against some of the council, which 
is a capital offence. For the king s 
council, after the first imprisonment 
of the duke of Somerset, with the 
view of uniting them more closely 
to each other, passed a law to this 
effect, that any one of the king s 
council who should plot in secret 
against another of that body, should 
suffer death by hanging as a felon. 
And as Somerset was said to have 
offended against this law, he was 
arrested on the i6th of October, and 
on the following day his wife, to 
gether with many other of the 
nobility who were thought to have 
been privy to this conspiracy. . . . 


of Somerset well aware, and knowing by experience 
before he was put in prison, that Warwick hated him 
with all his heart was persuaded by others to kill 
Warwick, and for that end went to his house under the 
pretence of paying him a visit. Finding that his enemy 
was in bed, he obtained access to his room as if for the 
purpose of renewing their friendship; but though pro 
tected by a coat of mail secretly worn, and though his 
friends also who accompanied him were in the next 
room, provided with concealed arms, nevertheless at 
the last moment he did not venture to strike his enemy 
lying defenceless on his bed, and came away without 
accomplishing his purpose. He was then betrayed by 
one of his own servants, 1 and afterwards condemned to 
death under a law 2 by which any one devising the 
murder of a member of the king s council, though he 
should do nothing more, was to die a murderer s death. 

When the protector Seymour, who ruled the king 
himself, was put out of the way by Dudley, against the 
king s will as it was said, everybody saw at once that 
Seymour, who was a weak man, never attained to his 
great honours by his own sagacity and skill, but rather 
through the craft of Dudley. Dudley knowing the man 
to be mean-spirited, more intent upon heaping up riches 
than on building up an honourable reputation, thought 
he could easily make use of him for the furtherance of 
all his plans, and then ruin him whenever he pleased. 
It was convenient for Dudley, who was not a man of 
very great weight at the death of Henry VIII., to make 
use of one who was of greater importance than he was 
in removing out of his way those who seemed likely to 

He was, however, beheaded on the oned with him as a complice, was 

22d of January, to the great grief of the person that ruined him." 

the people." 2 3 & 4 Edw. VI. c. 5. The trial of 

1 Burn et, Hist. Ref., ii. 305. "But the duke took place in Westminster 

Sir Thomas Palmer, though impris- Hall, Dec. i, 1551. 




thwart his schemes, and then to be able without much 
difficulty to ruin him through whom he had ruined the 

Accordingly, seeing that Edward Seymour, the king s 
uncle, was the fittest instrument for his purpose, he 
helped to advance him with all his might. Then by 
his aid he brought about the destruction of Thomas 
Seymour, his brother, a man of great capacity ; that 
done, he allied himself with the duke of Suffolk, 1 who 
was regarded as the next in power to the protector, and 
then ruined the protector himself. Then, at last, as if 
he thought very little of having raised himself from a 
moderate estate and condition 2 to the highest rank and 
honour those of a duke he resolved to mount up even 
to the royal throne. 

For when he saw king Edward wasting away, 3 he 
felt confident that after the two children of Henry VIII. 
Mary, the daughter of Catherine, and Elizabeth, the 
daughter of Anne Boleyn the right to the crown must 
devolve upon Frances duchess of Suffolk, 4 for he made 

1 Henry Grey, marquis of Dorset. 
He married Frances, daughter of 
Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, 
by his wife Mary, sister of Henry 
VIII. He was created duke of Suf 
folk Oct. 10, 1551, a few days before 
the arrest of the duke of Somerset. 
His daughter, Jane Grey, became 
the wife" of Guilford Dudley, the 
fourth son of the duke of Northum 

2 Burnet, Hist. Reform., ii. 86. 
"He was son to that Dudley who 
was attainted and executed the first 
year of Henry VIII. s reign." 

3 Stow, p. 609. " In the month 
of January [1553] the king fell sick 
of a cough at Whitehall, which 
grievously increased, and at last 
ended in a consumption of the 

4 Burnet, Hist. Reform., ii. 301. 
" The next in the will were the heirs 

of the French queen by Charles 
Brandon, who were the duchess of 
Suffolk and her sister, though I have 
seen it often said, in many letters 
and writings of that time, that all 
that issue by Charles Brandon was 
illegitimated, since he was certainly 
married to one Mortimer [Margaret, 
daughter of John Nevil, marquis 
Mountague, widow of Sir John Mor 
timer], which Mortimer lived long 
after his marriage to that queen, so 
that all her children were bastards. 
Some say he was divorced from his 
marriage to Mortimer, but that is 
not clear to me." Julius Teren- 
tianus (Original Letters, 182), writ 
ing Nov. 29, 1553, says :^" A few 
days before his death the king made 
a will at the instigation of Northum 
berland, by which he disinherited 
both his sisters, and appointed the 
Lady Frances, wife of the duke of 



[BOOK ii. 

no account of the other Mary who was queen of Scot 
land. Accordingly he persuaded Edward to disinherit 
Mary and Elizabeth, partly on the ground that they 
were not born in lawful wedlock that, however, could 
not be supposed of both and partly on the ground 
that they might be married to foreigners, to whom he 
should not like to make England subject ; and lastly, to 
save the Calvinistic teaching, which during the king s, 
infancy had flourished, from being rooted out under 
Mary. He advised the king to make Jane, one of the 
daughters of the duchess of Suffolk, his heir. Matters 
being thus arranged, his own son, Guilford Dudley, and 
Jane are betrothed in the month of May, and through 
him he trusts to possess himself of the sovereign 

King Edward departed this life 1 July 6 [1553], on 
the day and the month in which Sir Thomas More, 

Suffolk, to be his lieir. She declined 
it, and the kingdom was made over 
to her daughter Jane, who had been 
married two months before to the 
Lord Guilford, the third son of the 
duke of Northumberland." 

1 Julius Terentiaims, Original 
Letters, 182. " The most godly 
J osiah, our earthly hope, died on the 
6th of July ; of consumption, as the 
physicians assert; by poison, accord 
ing to common report ; for this is 
rumoured by the Papists for the 
purpose of exciting a general hatred 
against Northumberland ; nor, to 
tell the truth, were there wanting 
many and strong suspicions : but 
still, if I may say what I think, I 
believe the Papists themselves to 
have been the authors of so great a 
wickedness, for they have expressed 
no signs of sorrow, and no inquiry 
has been made respecting so great a 
crime. He does not say how the 
"Papists" could have come near 
enough to the person of the king so 
as to administer poison to him. The 

belief in the poisoning of the king 
was common among the Protestants, 
and is witnessed to by Burcher in a 
letter to Bullinger from Strasburg, 
Aug. 1 6, 1553 (Original Letters, 
325) : " That monster of a man the 
duke of Northumberland has been 
committing a horrible and porten 
tous crime. A writer worthy of 
credit informs me that our excellent 
king has been most shamefully taken 
off by poison. His nails and hair 
fell off before his death, so that, 
handsome as he was, he entirely lost 
all his good looks. The perpetra 
tors of the murder were ashamed of 
allowing the body to lie in state and 
be seen by the public, as is usual ; 
wherefore they buried him privately 
in a paddock adjoining the palace, 
and substituted in his place, to be 
seen by the people, a youth not very 
unlike him whom they had mur 
dered. One of the sons of the duke 
of Northumberland acknowledged 
this fact." 


fountain of honour and of justice, was beheaded a few 
years before by his father s orders ; and so it came to 
pass that all might see, who rightly consider the course 
of this world, that Henry paid in the death of his eldest 
son the penalty of the death of that great man, but yet 
did not satisfy the Divine justice, because he had not 
done penance for his sin according to the will of God. 






ON the fourth day after Edward s death, 1 that is, on 
the loth of July, Jane, daughter of Frances duchess 
of Suffolk, and granddaughter of Mary, sister of Henry 
VIII., was openly and publicly proclaimed queen under 
the will of king Edward ; meanwhile every one, not 
shouting for joy as the custom is on such occasions, but 
rather murmuring in secret, and execrating the unjust 
deed. 2 Jane, however, with her husband, Guilford 
Dudley, went by water to the Tower of London, as 
one taking possession of the royal throne. Many of the 
nobles also were there with her, for the duke of Nor 
thumberland had brought them thither either by fear 
or by fraud. He, indeed, had brought it to pass that 
nearly every man of weight throughout the realm had 
given his consent to the duke s will, and that in writing. 

1 Edward died July 6. On the sworn and charged to keep it se- 

8th the lord mayor was sent for to cret." 

Greenwich and told of the will by 2 Burnet, Hist. Reform., ii. p. 380. 

which the succession was changed, " There were very few that shouted 

when he and those who were with with the acclamations ordinary on 

him, says Stow (p. 609), li were such occasions/ 


Sir Francis Englefield, who was in the household of 
Mary, refused to sign anything against the interests of 
his mistress, and was committed to prison ; but if the 
duke of Northumberland had returned successful, he 
would also have lost his life. 

Meanwhile Mary, the daughter of Henry and of 
Catherine, the lawful heir to the throne, had fled for 
refuge to Framlingham Castle in Suffolk, 1 and there 
the people from all parts of the country flocked around 
her at once with incredible speed and zeal. 2 

Dudley, the duke of Northumberland, having brought 
certain troops together, marched out against Mary ; but 
the nobles, learning that throughout the realm Mary s 
rights were upheld not only by the people, but by the 
principal personages of the country, and that Dudley s 
army was wasting away by desertion, deprived Jane of 
the throne on the ninth day 3 of her occupation of it, 
and Mary obtained her rights. The next day the duke 
of Northumberland, already abandoned by his followers, 
surrendered at Cambridge, and on the 22d day of August 
next died on the block ; but before he died he re 
nounced all his heresies, and sincerely professed the 
Catholic faith, moved thereunto by Nicholas Heath, 4 
then bishop of Worcester, and afterwards archbishop of 

1 Stow, p. 6 1 6. " The Lady Mary pose of deceiving her, revolt from 
was fled to Framlingham Castle in her forthwith, and exert all their 
Suffolk, where the people of the coun- energies in behalf of Mary." 

try almost wholly resorted to her." 3 Ibid. " Thus Jane was queen 

2 Julius Terentianus, Original for only nine days, and those most 
Letters, No. 182. "Mary, who had turbulent ones. After some days 
most faithful councillors, by their Mary made her entry with great tri- 
advice went, as though defence- iiniph into the city, to take posses- 
less, into Norfolk, where she is re- sionof the Tower ; on entering which 
ceived and hailed as queen with she immediately set at liberty the 
general applause. . . . Almost the bishop of Winchester, the duke of 
entire nation rise to her assistance ; Norfolk, Lord Courtney, and the 
first of all the people of Norfolk and widow of the duke of Somerset. 
Suffolk, and then those of Oxford- 4 Consecrated in schism bishop of 
shire, Buckinghamshire, Berkshire, Kochester, by Gardiner, Sampson, 
and Essex. A portion too of the and Skip, April 4, 1540, and trans- 
nobility, who had given in their ad- lated to Worcester A.D. 1543, with- 
hesion to Jane merely for the pur- out any Bulls or lawful authority. t 


York. To his clear understanding and profound judg 
ment the Catholic faith alone seemed true, but he was 
blinded by his ambition. He saw that by pretending 
to be a heretic he had at least some chance of making 
himself a king, and that he had none whatever if he 
professed the Catholic faith. He preferred a kingdom 
obtained by heresy to subjection in the Catholic religion. 

After a schism which lasted twenty years, God gave 
the victory in a marvellous way to Mary, the Catholic 
princess, over almost all the nobles of the realm, and 
that without shedding one drop of blood. 1 It was a 
manifest miracle wrought before all the world in favour 
of the Catholic faith. 

Mary, then, the daughter of Catherine, entered in 
triumph the city and Tower of London, and at once 
restored to freedom and to their former rank, Edmund 
bishop of London, Stephen bishop of Winchester, 
Cuthbert bishop of Durham, all the other Catholics 
who were in prison for the profession of the faith, 
together with Thomas duke of Norfolk, and "William 
earl of Devon. 2 She rejected the title of the profane 
ecclesiastical supremacy, and resolved to restore the 
ancient rights and reverence due to the Apostolic See, 
which she had always honoured, even at the risk of her 
life, in the days of her father and brother, and sent for 
Cardinal Pole. 

She married Philip, son of the emperor Charles V. 

1 Foxe himself confesses it(vi. 388) : Gardiner, late bishop of Winchester, 
" God so turned the hearts of the Edward Courtney, son and heir to 
people to her, and against the Henry marquess of Exeter, the 
council, that she overcame them duchess of Somerset, prisoners in the 
-without bloodshed, notwithstanding Tower, kneeling on the hill within 
there was made great expedition the same Tower, saluted her grace, 
against her both by sea and land." and she came to them and kissed 

2 Stow, p. 613. "The queen them, and said, These be my 
entered the city through Aldgate, prisoners. On the next morrow, 
up to Leadenhall, then down Grace Edward Courtney was made mar- 
Street, Fenchurch Street, Mark Lane, quess of Exeter, and the other fore- 
Tower Street, and so into the Tower, named prisoners pardoned, and dis- 
where Thomas duke of Norfolk, Dr. charged in the queen s chamber." 




There were very grave reasons in favour of that marriage, 
but the chief was this : the prince would be a help to 
her in bringing the kingdom back again to the faith and 
obedience of the Church. 

Wyatt made a sedition in Kent for the purpose of 
thwarting the marriage and the reconciliation of the 
kingdom by renouncing heresy, but the queen overcame 
him, not so much by the valour of her troops as by her 
own admirable faith. 

The duke of Suffolk renewed the war, 1 was taken 
prisoner and beheaded. The queen sent succours to her 
husband, who was laying siege to St. Quintin, 2 and 
thereby lost Calais through the negligence or the 
treachery of her own subjects. 3 

Cranmer archbishop of Canterbury, who had pro 
nounced sentence of divorce against her mother, against 
all justice, was found guilty of high treason; 4 the sentence 
was confirmed in Parliament, and by his own confession. 
In the hope of saving his life, 5 he pretended to be a 

* 1 Collier, Eccles. Hist., ii. p. 360. 
" When Wyat s insurrection broke 
out in Kent, the duke of Suffolk, 
with his two brothers, Lord John 
and Lord Leonard Grey, rode down 
into Warwickshire and tried to raise 
the country against the Spaniard." 
He was tried by the Peers, Feb. 17, 
1554, and found guilty, suffering the 
penalty of death on the 2ist. 

2 Stow, p. 631. "The 1 8th of 
August [1557] the town of St. 
Quintins was taken by king Philip 
with the help of Englishmen." 

3 Stow, p. 632. " The loss of this 
town seemed strange to many men of 
great experience ; the same town be 
ing so many years so strongly fortified 
with all munitions that could be de 
vised, should now in so short space 
be taken of our enemies without fight 
or slaughter of any man more than 
Sir Antony Agar." P. 634 : " The 
2d of July, the Lord Wentworth 

and clivers others that had been 
governors of Calais, were attainted 
of treason, being then in France." 
P. 639: "The 22d of April [1559] 
William Lord Wentworth, late 
deputy of Calais, was arraigned at 
Westminster upon an indictment of 
treason ... for the loss of Calais, but 
he was acquit by his peers." 

4 Stow, p. 617. "The 1 3th of 
November, Dr. Cranmer, archbishop 
of Canterbury, Lady Jane, that was 
before proclaimed queen, and the 
Lord Guilford, her husband, and 
the Lord Ambrose Dudley were 
arraigned at the Guildhall of ^London 
and condemned of treason." Parlia 
ment, i Mar. c. 1 6, confirmed the 
attainder of the duke of Northum 
berland, Cranmer, and others. 

6 Burnet, ii. 535. " He was dealt 
with to renew his subscription, and 
then to write the whole over again, 
which he also did ; all this time 

CHAP. I.] 


22 3 

Catholic, and signed his recantations seventeen times with 
his own hand. In the end his hypocrisy was discovered, 
and certain bishops having degraded him from all ecclesi 
astical rank, delivered him up to the secular arm, when 
he was burnt in Oxford by order of the queen. 

The devotion, prudence, and firmness shown by the 
queen in the restoration of the Catholic religion through 
out all her dominions, ought not, I think, to be for 
gotten ; they are matters that redound to the everlasting 
honour of that most saintly woman, and to the shame 
and punishment of a sinful and unhappy people, that 
afterwards returned so readily to its vomit. 

In the very beginning, with the consent of Parlia 
ment, she repealed the impious laws of her brother 
against the Catholic faith, abolished the heretical reli 
gion, sent away the teachers of the sect, 1 and restored 

being under some small hopes of 
life; but conceiving likewise some 
jealousies that they might burn him, 
he writ secretly a paper containing 
a sincere confession of his faith, 
such as flowed from his conscience, 
and not from his weak fears." 
Harpsfield thus writes of his end 
(Treatise of Marriage, bk. iii. p. 130, 
Eyston MS.): "Now to what end 
he came, it is so late done and so 
notorious, that I need say nothing 
in it, only this I will tell you, that 
in all his life he never showed more 
inconstancy and mutability, nor 
more dangerous to his soul than at 
his very end ; for whereas he had by 
writing recanted and revoked his 
heresies and given out many copies 
thereof signed with his own hand, 
whereby if he had continued he 
might have saved his poor soul. Lo! 
suddenly the same day that he saw 
he should needs die, he revolted, 
and reverted with the dog to his 
pestilent vomit. So this revocation 
was only for an outward show, while 
he was yet in some hope to get 
thereby pardon for his temporal 

life, Avhereof, when he was in de 
spair, he discovered his crooked dis 
simulation, and desperately both cast 
away his body and soul. And as he 
entered his first preferment as you 
have heard with devilish dissimu 
lation, so he ended his wretched life 
in the same. Tins, lo ! is the pillar 
of this divorce. This is he that adven 
tured to take upon him the Pope s 
authority, and to give judgment 
againt the lawful marriage, which 
though it had been unlawful, yet 
had his sentence been unlawful for 
lack of competent j urisdiction. And 
yet if his jurisdiction had been com 
petent, there is no goodly wise man 
that might justly think [him] a meet 
person to commit such a weighty 
matter unto. And thus end we with 
this prelate made at the bearstake. 
Six copies of his recantations were 
published by Cawood, and may be 
seen in Strype, Mem., iii. i. 392, and 
in Jenkyns Works of Cranmer, iv. 

P- 393- 

"The queens proclamation for 
the driving out of the realm strangers 
arid foreigners " may be seen in Foxe, 


the Breviary and the Missal throughout England and 
Ireland, and all other places of her dominions ; it was 
done without difficulty, and it was done at once in the 
first Parliament of her reign. But the reparation of the 
fearful breach which Henry VIII. had made when he 
withdrew from the communion of the Apostolic See and 
of the Church throughout the world, and the restoration 
of the ancient observance of ecclesiastical obedience and 
submission in her dominions, must be a painful and 
laborious work ; nor could it be rightly done without 
the , grace and goodwill of the Pope. For that end, 
therefore, Cardinal Pole, dear to the queen for many 
reasons, was invited over at once. The Pope, Julius 
III., readily consented to the queen s request, and sent 
the Cardinal, furnished with the fullest powers, as Legate 
a latere to the king and queen and the whole realm. 
For before this Philip had landed in England, the mar 
riage had taken place, 1 and the reconciliation of the 
kingdom was earnestly promoted by the authority of 
the king and the queen. 

On the 1 2 th of November [1554] Parliament assem 
bled in London, 2 and recalled Cardinal Pole, who had 

vi. p. 429. " The queen our sove- with the like. Insomuch as beside 

reign lady, understanding that a mul- innumerable heresies which divers 

titude of evil-disposed persons, being of the same, being heretics, have 

born out of her highness s dominions, preached and taught," &c. 

in other sundry nations, flying 1 Philip and Mary were married 

from the obeisance of the princes and by Gardiner in the cathedral church 

rulers under whom they be born, of Winchester, July 25, 1554. 

some for heresy; some for murder, 2 Stow, p. 625. ^ "The I2th of 

treason, robbery ; and some for other November the Parliament began at 

horrible crimes, be resorted into this Westminster. The 24th of November 

her majesty s realm, and here have Cardinal Poole came out of Brabant 

made their demurrer, and yet be into England, and was received with 

commorant and lingering, partly to much honour ; he was by Parliament 

eschew such condign punishment as restored to his old dignity that he 

their said horrible crimes deserve, was put from by king Henry, and 

and partly to dilate, plant, and sow shortly after came to the Parliament- 

the seeds of their malicious doctrine house, where the king, queen, and 

and lewd conversation among the other states were present. Then he 

good subjects of this her said realm, declared the cause of his legacy, and 

on purpose to infect her good subjects exhorted them to return to the coin- 


been for some time in Brabant. On the 23d day of the 
same month he entered the city in great state, and on 
the fifth day thereafter went to the assembly of the 
Estates, called there the Parliament, and in the presence 
of the king and the queen made known the reasons why 
the Pope had sent him as his Legate, urged a return to 
the communion of the Church, the restoration of his 
lawful jurisdiction to His Holiness the Pope, the suc 
cessor of the prince of the apostles, who in his com 
passion was ready to receive them back. He also 
reminded them that they should give thanks unto God, 
who had given them such a king and such a queen. 
At the conclusion of his address he left the house. 

Then the bishop of Winchester, who was also the lord 
chancellor, 1 spoke to the same effect, and urged them at 
great length to return to unity and peace, and to give 
most hearty thanks unto God, who in His infinite com 
passion had raised up a prophet who was of their own 
race, the most eminent Cardinal, wholly devoted to 
their welfare. 

On the following day the two Houses of Parliament, 2 
after hearing the speech and demands of the Legate, and 
consenting thereunto, petitioned the king and the queen 
to intercede with him on their behalf. In their petition 
they said that they were very sorry for the schism, for 
the refusal of obedience to the Apostolic See, and for 
their assenting to laws made against it ; for the future 
they would be subject to the Pope and to the queen, and 

munion of the Church, and to re- out a form of supplication, the sum 

store the Pope his due authority, whereof was that they greatly re- 

Secondly, he advertised them to give pented them of all that schism that 

thanks to God, that had sent them they had lived in, and therefore de- 

so blessed a king and queen." sired the king, queen, and Cardinal 

1 He was made chancellor Aug. that by their means they might 
23. be restored to the bosom of the 

2 Stow, p. 625. "The next day Church and obedience of the See 
the whole court of Parliament drew of Rome." 



would do all they could for the repeal of those laws in the 
present Parliament. They were most earnest in their 
petition for release from the censures they had incurred, 
according to the laws of the Church, through their 
schism, and for their restoration into the bosom of 
Christ s Church, as penitent children, that for the rest 
of their lives they might, in the obedience of the Eoman 
Pontiffs and See, serve God to the glory of His name 
and the increase of their own prosperity. 1 

Two days afterwards [November 30], in the presence of 
the king, the queen, and the Legate, the lord chancellor 
stood up and gave an account of the resolutions of both 
Houses of Parliament in answer to the demand of the 
Legate. That done, he presented the humble petition 
of both houses, in writing and under seal, to the king 
and the queen, praying them at the same time to accept 
it. The king and the queen having opened the paper, 
returned it to the chancellor that it might be read. 
Whereupon the chancellor demanded of all those then 
present, as representing the whole realm, whether they 
agreed in that petition. They answered that they did ; 

1 This petition was afterwards otherwise doing or speaking, that 
embodied in the statute I & 2 might impugn the same : offering 
Philip and Mary, c. ^ 8, sec. 2. ourselves and promising by this our 
" We, the Lords spiritual and supplication that, for a token and 
temporal and the Commons assem- knowledge of our said repentance, 
Lied in this present Parliament, re- we be and shall be always ready, un- 
presenting the whole body of the der and with the authorities of your 
realm of England and the dominions majesties, ... to do that shall lie 
of the same, in the name of ourselves in us for the abrogation and repeal- 
particularly, and also of the said ing of the said laws and ordinances 
body universally, in this our suppli- in this present Parliament, as well 
cation, directed to your majesties, for ourselves as for the whole body 
... do declare ourselves very sorry whom we represent, ... set forth 
and repentant of the schism and dis- this our most humble suit, that we 
obedience committed in this realm may obtain from the See Apostolic, 
and dominions aforesaid against the ... as well particularly as gene- 
said See Apostolic, either by making, rally, absolution, release, and dis 
agreeing, or executing any laws, or- charge from all danger of such cen- 
dinances, or commandments against sure and sentences as by the laws of 
the supremacy of the said See, or the Church we be fallen into." 

HAP. I.] 



thereupon the king and the queen rose and presented it 
to the Legate, who read it. 

Then the Legate, having read the petition of both 
houses, brings forth in turn the Bull of his faculties as 
Legate ; that also is read, in order that all might know 
that the Pope had given him power to absolve them. 

After this the Legate preached to them, and saying 
how pleasing unto God is penance, and how the angels 
are glad when the sinner repents. Having illustrated 
this by many examples, he gave thanks unto God, who 
had breathed into them a spirit willing to be reformed. 
Then he stood up the king and the queen rising and 
falling on their knees and prayed God to pour down 
His mercy upon them, to look with compassion on His 
people, and to forgive them their sin ; and then saying 
that he had been sent by the sovereign Pontiff, the 
Vicar of Christ, to absolve them, blessed the whole 
assembly and absolved it. 

They went then to the chapel, .where they gave thanks 
unto God, singing His praises, followed by tokens of joy 
and gladness, according to the custom. 1 

1 Stow, p. 625. "The next day, 
the king, queen, and Cardinal being 
present, the lord chancellor declared 
what the Parliament had determined 
concerning the Cardinal s request, 
and offered to the king and queen 
the supplication before mentioned, 
which being read, the Cardinal, in a 
large oration, declared how accept 

able repentance was in the sight of 
God, &c. And immediately mak 
ing prayer unto God, by authority 
to him committed, absolved them. 
When all this was done, they went 
all unto the chapel, and there sing 
ing Te Deum with great solemnity, 
declared the joy that for this re 
conciliation was pretended." 

( 228 ) 



ON the 2d da} 7 of December 1 the king and the Legate, 
with almost all the chief personages of the whole king 
dom, went to St. Paul s, where the bishop of Winchester, 
the lord chancellor, preached a sermon from that most 
famous pulpit of St. Paul s Cross. 2 He told the people, 
after a devout preface, with what sincerity the three 
estates, representing the whole kingdom, had placed 
themselves under obedience to the Apostolic See ; with 
what charity the Legate of our most holy lord the 
Pope had received them, and absolved them from their 
sins and from the censures they had incurred. He then 
exhorted them all to give continual thanks unto God 
for a grace so great, to His Holiness the Pope, and to 
the king and queen, their most religious sovereigns. 
Not long after this, ambassadors were sent to Rome on 
the part of the king and the queen, and of the people, 
who on behalf of the whole realm were to promise duti 
ful obedience to the Apostolic See. 3 

1 The first Sunday in Advent, king came from Westminster by 
J1J54. land at eleven of the clock, and then 

2 Stow, p. 625. " The 2d of the lord chancellor entered Paul s 
December Cardinal Poole came from cross and preached a sermon, taking 
Lambeth by water and landed at for his theme these words : * Fratres, 
Paul s Wharf, and from thence to scientes quia hora est jam nos de 
Paul s Church, with a cross, two somno surgere. " The substance of 
pillars, two poleaxes of silver borne the sermon may be seen in Foxe, vi. 
before him. He was there received 577. 

by the lord chancellor, with pro- 3 These were the Viscount Mon- 
cession, where he tarried till the tague, the bishop of Ely, and Sir 


But the sins and the sacrilege of Henry VIII., and the 
wickedness of the people, were such that they could not 
be thus lightly expiated, and therefore this calm did 
not last. The queen having reigned five years and four 
months, changed the earthly for the heavenly kingdom ; 
unhappy in this, that being the child of Henry VIII. , 
no child might be born of her. It was the will of God 
that Henry VIII. , for his sins and for the schism, should 
be thus severely punished ; for though when he died he 
left three children living Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth 
yet of none of them might a child be born and reared. 
But still more unhappy did she regard herself in that 
she was forced to leave the kingdom to Elizabeth, not 
only her rival and a bastard, but one whom, notwith 
standing her dissimulation, she suspected to be a heretic, 
and always feared would be a plague to the state and to 

I must now explain briefly how and by what title 
Elizabeth came to the throne. 

Mary, it is true, made more than one effort to shut 
her out from the succession, either on the ground of 
heresy or on that of treason for she had done many 
things against her sister and the state or on the clearer 
ground of her tainted birth, for the pretended marriage 
of Henry and Anne, with the issue thereof, was, as we 
have said before, distinctly declared unlawful by a 
judicial decision of Clement VII. The like decision was 
made in Parliament afterwards by commandment of the 
king when he was in a calmer mood. 1 Besides, the 

Edward Came. Sir Richard Mori- Elizabeth are declared bastards, and 

son, writing to Bullinger from Stras- the crown is settled upon the issue 

burg, Aug. 23, 1555 (Original Letters, of Jane Seymour ; the oath in fav- 

No. 75), thus speaks of them : " Our our of Elizabeth is dispensed with, 

ambassadors, who went to Rome for for the new oath is to this effect : 

the purpose of bringing back the " And in case any other oath be made 

wolf upon the sheep of Christ, are or hath been made by you to any per- 

now with the emperor." son or persons, that then ye do repute 

1 28 Henry VIII. c. 7. Mary and the same as vain and annihilate." 


king released his subjects from the observance of the 
oath which they had taken in favour of Anne and her 
child, and, moreover, declared in Parliament that Anne 
never was, and never could have been, his wife, for 
certain reasons communicated by him, as he said, 
under the seal of secrecy, to the archbishop of Canter 
bury. 1 

And though in the thirty-fifth year of his reign, 2 hav 
ing obtained authority from Parliament to nominate his- 
successors, he willed that Elizabeth should have a place 
in the order of succession to the throne ; nevertheless, 
neither her own birth nor the marriage of her father and 
mother was by any subsequent law sanctioned or made 
lawful either by Henry her father or by herself. Her 
right to the throne, therefore, stands on the act of Parlia 
ment, and not upon any title which is hers by right of 
birth, nor has she any better title at this day. 

On the other hand, the two Houses of Parliament, in 
the first year of the reign of queen Mary, 3 declared the 
marriage of Henry and Catherine valid, and the issue 
thereof, by human and divine law, to have been born in 
lawful wedlock ; repealing at the same time all acts, 

1 Cranmer, who, May 28, 1533, just, true, and lawful impediments, 
had pronounced the marriage of unknown " at the time, " were con- 
Henry and Anne Boleyn to be good, fessed by the said Lady Anne be- 
pronounced that very marriage, May fore" Cranmer "sitting judicially." 
17, 1536, a nullity ; that is, the mar- The reason of the invalidity of the 
riage never was good : " Prorsus et marriage must be some secret sin, 
omnino fuisse nullum, invalidum et for all honest and lawful imped i- 
inane, viribus quoque et effectu juris ments to the marriage were perfectly 
semper caruisse et carere, ac nullius well known at the time it was made. 
fuisse et esse roboris sen momenti" He The former marriage with Catherine, 
did this for certain reasons, true Just, and the engagement with Percy, 
and lawful, lately brought to his even if it were a contract, were not 
knowledge; but he does not recite "unknown," and could not be the 
those reasons, nor does he say that grounds on which this marriage 
they were brought to his knowledge " was never good." 
in the course of the trial. He does 2 35 Henry VIII. c. I. 
not even say who revealed them. But 3 In the second session of Parlia- 
in the act of Parliament (28 Henry ment, but in the first year. I Maria, 
VIII. c. 7) it is said that -certain c. i. 


processes, and sentences to the contrary. The marriage 
of Anne, therefore for Catherine was still living 
could not be valid, and her issue must be bastard, and 
incapable, naturally, of succeeding in any way according 
to the municipal law, which gives bastards no title to 
the crown of England ; and to this day this law has not 
been repealed even by Elizabeth herself. She, it is true, 
claimed the throne as her right, and willed that every 
body should acknowledge her right in her first Parlia 
ment, but she never grounded her right upon anything 
else than on the power of Parliament ; she never claimed 
the crown as her birthright. Care was taken afterwards 
to make it a capital offence to deny the right of the king 
and the estates of the realm to give the kingdom to 
whom they pleased. 1 No word was ever uttered for 
the purpose of making her legitimate, or clearing away 
the taint of her birth ; on that point the silence was 

But to return. Mary, who knew too well that the 
child of Henry and Anne Boleyn was a child born 
in adultery and worse, aod therefore unworthy of the 
crown, was never satisfied with that law on which the 
title of Elizabeth to the throne was grounded. But as 
she alone, of her own authority, could not repeal that 
law without the consent of the Lords and Commons, she 
was forced to be content with doing that which was 
in her power to do. Many, she knew, held that most 
iniquitous and deadly opinion, namely, that it was 
better for them to be governed by a bastard and a 
heretic, provided he were one of themselves born in the 
country, than by a foreigner, however good and lawful 
his title. This perverse opinion has often brought upon 
England, and on many thriving countries, the most severe 
chastisements of God. Under these circumstances, 

1 13 Eliz. c. i. 


tlie best course to follow was most prudently followed 
by Mary. At the approach of death she sent some 
of her council to Elizabeth, to ask her, among other 
things, two things in particular : the payment of the 
queen s debts ; the money borrowed of her subjects, 
which she had spent in the public service, and for which 
she had pledged her royal word. The second was, not 
to allow the Catholic religion, now settled in England, 
to be destroyed or undermined. Elizabeth, who had 
always pretended to be a Catholic during her sister s 
reign and had once, in the presence of some of the 
council, wished the earth might open and swallow her 
up, if she was not so in truth with her usual hypocrisy 
gave her most solemn promise to do that which the 
queen asked of her, and never performed it. 1 

Mary died. 2 God had raised up this most saintly 
woman, and placed her in the midst of the Anglican 
schism as a faithful sign, to the great consolation of 

1 Edwin Sandys, afterwards a me the crown of this kingdom. For 

bishop under Elizabeth, thus de- she has neither the power of bestow- 

scribes this in a letter to Bullinger, ing it upon me, nor can I lawfully 

Dec. 20, 1558 (Zurich Letters, No. 2): be deprived of it, since it is my 

"Mary not long before her death peculiar and hereditary right. With 

Bent two members of her council to respect to the council, I think my- 

her sister Elizabeth, and commanded self, she said, as much at liberty to 

them to let her know in the first choose my counsellors as she was to 

place that it was her intention to choose her own. As to religion, I 

bequeath to her the royal crown, promise this much, that I will not 

together with all the dignity that change it, provided only it can be 

fche was then in possession of by proved by the Word of God, which 

right of inheritance. In return, how- shall be the only foundation and rule 

ever, for this great favour conferred of my religion. And when, lastly, 

upon her, she required of her these she requires the payments of her 

three things: first, that she would not debts, she seems to me to require 

change her privy council; secondly, nothing more than what is just, 

that she would make no alteration and I will take care that they shall 

in religion ; and thirdly, that she be paid, as far as may lie in my 

would discharge her debts and satisfy power. " It is possible, certainly, 

her creditors. Elizabeth replied in that Sandys may have believed the 

these terms : I am very sorry to account he gives to be true, 

hear of the queen s illness ; but 2 The queen died on Thursday, 

there is no reason why I should Nov. 17, 1558. 
thank her for her intention to give 



the Catholics, that they might not be discouraged and 
crushed under the burden of heresy. Cardinal Pole 1 
also, on the same day, and about twelve hours after 
the queen, departed this life. Then came the hour 
of Satan, and the power of darkness took possession 
of the whole of England. 2 

1 Edwin Sandys, to whom Eliza 
beth gave the bishoprics succes 
sively of Worcester, London, and 
York, thus announces these facts to 
Bullinger in a letter from Stras- 
burg, Dec. 20, 1558 (Zurich Letters, 
No. 2) : " We yesterday received a 
letter from England, in which the 
death of Mary, the accession of Eliza 
beth, and the decease of Cardinal 
Pole is confirmed. That good car 

dinal, that he might not raise any 
disturbance, or impede the progress 
of the gospel, departed this life the 
day after his friend Mary Maria 
sua. Such was the love and har 
mony between them that not even 
death itself could separate them. 
We have nothing therefore to fear 
from Pole, for dead men do not 

2 St. Luke xxii. 53. 






( 237 ) 



THE author of the foregoing history had also written 
the story of some of the years of Elizabeth ; but as he 
is no longer living, others are preparing a more exact 
account of the life, manners, and government of this 
woman, to be published in due time. At present we 
give but briefly the story of her doings against the 
Church, that seeing the claws of the lioness, people may 
recognise her when a fuller account shall be given. 

The government of the Church was given by Christ 
to the apostles and their successors, and especially 
above all others to Peter, the high priest and Pope ; 
but the English Protestants maintain that the govern 
ment of the Church ought to be in every country in the 
hands of the laymen by whom those countries are 
governed. God, therefore, for the refutation of this 
heresy, brought it about that the government of the 
Church in England should fall first into the hands of no 
other layman than Henry VIII., who was a most im 
pious and sacrilegious tyrant ; then after him into those 
of the boy Edward ; and then of Elizabeth, a woman. 

Henry was not, but he might have been for his age 
and sex allowed it a minister of the Word of God, by 
which the Church is chiefly ordered, and a judge in 
sacred things. Edward neither was nor could be a 
minister of the Word, for his youth forbade it, though 
his sex allowed it. But Elizabeth, on account of her 


sex, never could be a minister of the Word, without 
which the government of the Church becomes impos 
sible. Hence it has come to pass that, according to the 
teaching of Protestants, the highest place in the govern 
ment of the Church is filled by one who not only is not 
in possession of it this applies to Henry and Edward 
also but by one who never can possess it ; and this 
applies to Elizabeth alone, and has been pointed out by 
St. Chrysostom in these remarkable words : " When 
the government of the Church is in question, that is a 
work which, because of its greatness, cannot belong to a 
woman." 1 For as there are men in the Church as well 
as women, and as in the beginning God made the wo 
man out of the man, and for the sake of the man, man 
is therefore by the law of nature the head of the woman ; 
so also Christ is the head of the man, and God the head 
of Christ. 2 Now, as it never can come to pass that 
Christ should govern God, or any man govern Christ, so 
also it can never be that a woman may govern either 
the man or the Church of Christ, in which there are 
men at all times, rightly and orderly, in those things 
which are the things of God and of Christ. 

When Satan was about to disturb the blessed order 
which God had established, he put the woman forward 
as one who was to teach man how to break the laws 
of God, and he set her up as the teacher and guide of 
man, to the utter ruin of the whole human race. But 
the Son of God, whom the Father hath appointed to 
judge and re-establish all things, has repeated His 
command, that the woman should be subject to man. 
The apostle Paul calls that command a law, saying that 
it prevails in ecclesiastical matters ; and his words are, 
" Let women hold their peace in the churches ; for it is 

1 De Sacerdotio, lib. ii. ; Op., torn. i. p. 372, ed. Ben. 

2 i Cor. xi. 3. 


not permitted them to speak, but to be subject, as also 
the law saith." 1 If then by the law, not the law of 
Moses, but the law of God, proclaimed in Paradise, the 
woman in the Church must be subject, how can she be 
the governor of the Church in which her duty is to be 
subject? Moreover, the apostle, according to the law 
of nature, forbids the woman to pray or prophesy 
with her head uncovered : 2 that is to be a perpetual 
token of her subjection. She is reminded by the 
ceremonial of the rite that the female sex has no autho 
rity in the administration of sacred things, and that 
the woman must be as it were unseen in the divine 
solemnities. If she will not keep this law, that is, if 
she will not be covered, saith the apostle, " let her be 
shorn ; for if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or 
made bald, let her cover her head," 3 if not because of 
men, who are generally present in churches, yet at least 
because of the angels, who are never absent ; whether 
by angels we understand the priests of Christ and the 
ministers of His sacraments, 4 with St. Ambrose, 5 or those 
blessed spirits who ever guard and defend the churches 
as the fortresses of God. 

But the woman, who is of man and for man created 
whom Satan places over man in the things of God, but 
whom Christ subjects again to man in those things, 
and who because of the angels chiefly is commanded to 
be covered is, according to the teaching of Protestants, 
rightly placed, not only in authority over men in the 
Church generally, but over the very angels themselves 
whose lips keep the knowledge of God, and from 
whose mouth we seek His law 6 and that not in the 
lowest rank, not in the second or the third, but in the 
very highest rank, next unto Christ Himself, with juris- 

1 i Cor. xiv. 34. 2 i Cor. xi. 3-16. 3 I Cor. xi. 6. 

4 i Cor. iv. i. t 6 Lib. de Mysteriis, c. 2. 6 Malach. ii. 7. 


diction in ecclesiastical affairs : there never has been 
any blasphemy in the world, if this be none. 

It was not without reason that the apostle said of 
women laden with sins that they were more easily 
deceived than others by heretics. 1 Experience shows 
that women, eager in the pursuit of anything, especially 
if that thing be wrong, are more eager and more dan 
gerous than men in that pursuit, and that men always 
are most easily and most fatally ensnared by them. St. 
Jerome 2 has observed that nearly every heresy before 
his day had been spread by the help of women whom 
their followers worshipped almost with divine honours. 
We read of the Pepuziani, 3 heretics of most impure lives, 
that they treated women with such respect as to give 
to them alone the ministration of their sacred rites and 
sacraments. Finally, all men see that this unhappy 
generation, and that most abandoned sect, have their 
Athalia, 4 Maacha, 5 Jezabel, 6 Herodias, 7 Selene, 8 Con 
st antia, 9 and Eudoxia. 10 

But Elizabeth has surpassed them all, she has taken 
upon herself the supremacy in the things of God, over 
even bishops and priests. We shall now speak of her 
ecclesiastical supremacy and administration. 

1 2 Tim. ii. 6. and slew the prophet. 3 Kings xvi. 

2 Ep. 133, ad Ctesiphontem, s. 4, 31 ; xviii. 23. 

ed. Vallars. 7 Herodias, the incestuous wife of 

3 S. Augustin. de Hseresibus, c. 27. Herod Antipas, and the mother of 
" Pepuziani . . . tantum dantes muli- Salome, who at her suggestion asked 
eribus principatum ut sacerdotes for the head of St. John Baptist, 
quoque apud eos honorentur." St. Matt. xiv. 3-10. 

4 Athalia, daughter of Achab and 8 Selene, or Helene, a woman of 
the wife of Joram king of Juda. She evil life, the companion of Simon 
put to death as many as she could Magus. Tertullian, De Anima, c. 34. 
of the royal family, and made her- 9 Constantia, daughter of Con- 
self queen. See 4 Kings xi. i. stantine the Great, who for her 

6 Maacha, wife of Koboam and cruel and ruthless temper was called 

mother of Abiam, his son and sue- Megsera. Ammian. Marcellin., lib. 

cessor. She was a priestess of im- xiv. c. i. 

pious and filthy rites. 3 Kings xv. 1 3. 10 Eudoxia, the wife of the emperor 

6 Jezabel, wife of Achab. She was Arcadius, and the persecutor of St. 

not a Jewess, and persecuted Elias, John Chrysostom. 





ON the death of Mary, Elizabeth ascended the throne, 
another daughter of Henry VIII., being the child of his 
concubine Anne Boleyn, and born in the lifetime of 
Catherine his wife, whom he had put away. Eliza 
beth, though she professed the Catholic faith in all 
things while her sister lived, now, under the pressure of 
the fear, suggested by certain treacherous heretics whom 
she admitted into the council, that because she was the 
issue of a marriage condemned by the Church and the 
sovereign Pontiff, a doubt might be raised touching her 
birth and her title to the throne for the sacred canons 
were against her refused to submit to the ecclesiastical 
laws, and made up her mind to change at the first 
opportunity the form of religion and of the government 
of the Church. 1 

She made her purpose manifest at once in many ways, 

1 Heylyn, Hist. Reform., iii. p. men condemned the new lord-keeper, 

107. _ "In this Parliament [the first on whose judgment she relied espe- 

of Elizabeth] there passed an act for cially in point of law ; in whom it 

recognising the queen s just title to could not but be looked on as a 

the crown, but without any act for great incogitancy to be less careful 

the validity of her mother s mar- of her own and her mother s honour 

riage, on which her title most de- than the ministers of the late queen, 

pended. For which neglect most Mary had been of hers." 



[BOOK iv. 

but especially by silencing the Catholic preachers. 1 She 
allowed the heretics to return to the country from the 
several places to which they had banished themselves, 2 
and ordered a bishop, about to say Mass in her presence, 
and standing in his vestment before the altar, to ab 
stain from elevating the Host at the consecration. 3 In 
consequence of these proceedings, the archbishop of 
York, who, now that the Primate, Cardinal Pole, was 
dead, would have had to crown her, refused to do so, as 
did the other bishops also, with one exception, and he 
almost the youngest of them. 4 

At her coronation, by the advice of men who, for the 

1 Jewell, writing to Peter Martyr, 
Jan. 26, 1559 (Zurich Letters, i. 
No. 3), says, " The queen has forbid 
den any person, whether Papist or 
Gospeller, to preach to the people. 
Some think the reason of this to be 
that there was at that time only one 
minister of the Word in London, 
namely, Bentham, whereas the num 
ber of Papists was very considerable." 
The proclamation of the queen is 
printed by Wilkins (ConciL, iv. 180), 
who took it from Strype. Richard 
Hilles, writing to Bullinger from 
London, Feb. 28, 1559 (Zurich Let 
ters, ii. No. 8), says, " With_ respect 
to religion, silence has been imposed 
upon the Catholic preachers, as they 
are called, by a royal proclamation, 
and sufficient liberty is allowed to 
the Gospellers to preach three times 
a week during this Lent, before the 
queen herself, and to prove their doc 
trines from the Holy Scriptures." 

2 Jewell says (Zurich Letters, i. 
No. 3) in a letter to Peter Martyr, 
written Jan. 26, 1559, " All we hear 
is, that their return was very accept 
able to the queen, an d that ^ she has 
openly declared her satisfaction." 

3 Dod (ed. Tierney, ii. 124) says 
that the bishop was Heath, the lord 
chancellor and archbishop of York ; 
but Mr. Tierney refers to Cardinal 

Allen, who says the bishop was 
Oglethorpe of Carlisle. In the de 
positions made before Alexander 
Riarius, Curise Camera Apostolicsa 
Generalis Auditor, Feb. 7, 1570, the 
Reverend Edmund Daniel, dean of 
Hereford, testified as follows (Lader- 
chins, iii. 204) : " Scio insuper et 
adfueram cum Regina Elizabeth in 
sacello esset sub anno 1559 ubi Mis- 
sam celebraiite episcopo Carleolense, 
dum cantores Gloriam in Excelsis 
canebant, ipsa unum qui a secretis ei 
erat, ad eunidem episcopum misit, qui 
proeciperet ne Hostiam elevaret. At 
episcopus, ut accepi, respondit, se 
juxta Catholicse Ecclesise consuetu- 
dinem Hostiam elevare velle. Quare 
regina, antequam Evangelium dicere- 
tur, discessit, et ipse a secretis mihi 
dixit quod discesserat ne videret 
Sacramenti elevation em. Et decanus, 
reginae nomine prcecepit mihi, ut 
die S. Stephani celebrare deberem, 
sine tameii elevatione. Quod quidem 
facere recusavi. Quare ilia -postea 
sacellanum suum, Minter appella- 
tum, misit, qui absque elevatione 
celebravit ; et videbam reginam 
quse aderat huic, quia ego quoque 
aderam, et prsefatus presbyter non 

4 Owen Oglethorpe, president of 
Magdalene College, Oxford, was con- 


purpose of obtaining a crown, thought it ] awful to lie 
and dissemble, to swear and to forswear, she took the 
usual oath of Christian kings, prescribed by tradition 
and by law, in the most solemn way, to defend the 
Catholic faith, and to guard the rights and immunities 
of the Church. That was done in order that at a later 
time her possession of the crown might not be called in 
question. She was also anointed, but she disliked the 
ceremony and ridiculed it ; for when she withdrew, ac 
cording to the custom, to put on the royal garments, it is 
reported that she said to the noble ladies in attendance 
upon her, " Away with you, the oil is stinking 1 " 

There were certain men about her either of the new 
religion or of none, and among these was William Cecil, 1 
one of the councillors of Edward VI. , a man supple in 
mind, counsel, and conscience. Shortly before this he 
had assumed the appearance of a Catholic with so much 
cunning as to offer his services, not without the expec 
tation of reward, to queen Mary and to Cardinal Pole. 
They refused to have anything to do with him, and so 
he went over to Elizabeth, and now, on her accession, 
hoped to rise to the highest honours in the state, espe 
cially if she abolished the old religion, declined the 
counsels of the old nobility and the prelates, and listened 
to him and his friends. The unhappy queen yielded, 
and so he enriched himself and his friends, and em 
broiled the kingdom more and more, so that there was 

secrated bishop of Carlisle on the not consonant to the Scriptures and 

least of the Assumption, 1557. Un- ancient writers." 

tier Edward VI. he had professed J Cecil was in the service of the 

heresy. Burnet, v. 312, ed. Pocock : duke of Somerset originally as mas- 

" I did never preach," he says, or ter of requests, being the first, ac- 

teach openly anything contrary to cording to Camden (Annales rerum 

the doctrine and religion set forth Anglicarum, p. 774, ed. Hearne), on 

by the king s majesty. . . . The the authority of Cecil himself, who 

foolish and lately-received doctrine bore that title in England ; others 

concerning the sacraments, and say that he was simply the duke s 

namely the attribute of transubstan- secretary. He was made Lord 

tiation, I do not like, and I think it Burghley, Feb. 25, 1571. 


no hope of good left, and brought himself and the queen 
and the country into such misery by his greed that there 
is no way of escape. 

Soon afterwards, chiefly by the advice of Cecil, she, 
being a woman, would have herself styled, by an act of 
the Parliament then assembled, the supreme governor 
of the Church 1 of these realms, even in things spiritual. 
"With the exception of the lay peers, all persons were 
bound to acknowledge her title upon oath. It was not 
thought proper to call her the head of the Church, be 
cause Calvin 2 had disapproved of the assumption of 
that title by her father Henry VIII. These are the 
words of the accursed oath : 

"I, A. B., do utterly testify and declare in my con 
science that the queen s highness is the only supreme 
governor of this realm, and of all other her highnesses 
dominions and countries, as well in all spiritual or 
ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal ; and that no 
foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate hath, 
or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, 
pre-eminence, or authority ecclesiastical or spiritual 
within this realm ; and therefore I do utterly renounce 
and forsake all foreign jurisdictions, powers, superiori 
ties, and authorities." 3 

1 Sandys, writing to Parker, April No. 12), " The queen is not willing 
3, 1559 (Burnet, Hist. Reform., v. to be called the head of the Church 
505, ed. Pocock), thus speaks : "The of England, although this title has 
bill of supreme government of both been offered her ; but she willingly 
the temporally and clergy passeth accepts the title of governor, which 
with a proviso that nothing shall be amounts to the same thing. The 
judged heresy which is not con- Pope is again driven from England, 
demned by the canonical Scriptures to the great regret of the bishops 
and four general councils. Mr. and the whole tribe of shavelings. 
Lever wisely put such a scruple in The Mass is abolished." 
the queen s head, that she would not 2 Calvin, Comment, in Amos, c. 
take the title of supreme head. The vii. 13. " Erant enim blasphemi qui 
bishops, as it is said, will not swear vocarent eum [HenricumVIIL] sum- 
nnto it as it is, but rather lose their mum caput ecclesise sub Christo." 
livings." Parkhurst writes to Bulliri- 3 I Eliz. c. I. The oath is con 
ger, May 21, 1559 (Zurich Letters, i. tinned in these terms ; " And do pro- 


Beside others who are to take this oath, all arch 
bishops, bishops, ecclesiastical officers, and the whole 
of the clergy, are expressly bound. If any one refuses, 
he forfeits, at the first refusal, his benefices, all his 
goods and chattels, and is to be kept in prison for the 
rest of his life. If the oath be refused the second time, 
the penalty of the recusant is death after the manner 
of traitors. 1 

Now, when the less instructed in these matters found 
that the word "head" which was in the first act of 
Parliament had not been inserted in the oath, they in 
their simplicity rejoiced that people had not gone to 
such lengths as to give to a woman that which they 
thought might be honourably yielded as they thought 
formerly to Henry and Edward, who were men. 
Thereupon very many persons, not Calvinists only, 
but some Catholics a] so, somehow imagined that the 
taking of this oath was more excusable. 

Others, seeing more clearly, discerned the trick, or, 
may one say, the blundering of the lawmakers, and 
pointed out that the meaning was the same whether the 
queen was called head or governor, that there was no 
difference of sense in the difference of words : that the 
terms of the oath carried the impiety, and the usurpation 
of the sovereign ecclesiastical jurisdiction, much farther 
than the mere title of head given to the two kings. It 
is necessary, they said, to admit and swear, according 

mise that from henceforth I shall * 5 Eliz. c. i, s. 8. "Shall suffer 

bear faith and true allegiance to the and incur the dangers, penalties, 

queen s highness, her heirs and law- pains, and forfeitures ordained and 

i ul successors, and to my power shall provided by the statute of provision 

assist and defend all jurisdictions, and Praemunire," &c. 
privileges, pre-eminences, and autho- S. n. "For the same second 

rities granted or belonging to the offence and offences shall forfeit, 

queen s highness, her heirs and sue- lose, and suffer suchlike and the 

cessors, or united and annexed to the same pains, forfeitures, judgment, 

imperial crown, of this realm. So and execution as is used in cases of 

help me God, and by the contents of high treason." 
this book." 



[BOOK iv. 

to this oath, that the queen s power in spiritual and 
ecclesiastical things is not less than her power in the 
temporal affairs of the realm ; indeed, many thought 
that, according to the act of Parliament, the queen 
might have claimed the priestly power, even that of 
administering sacraments. 

The queen, learning that some people had this scruple 
against taking the oath, ordered the publication of a 
certain exposition or correction of it, in her first visita 
tion of the clergy, namely, that she neither desired nor 
claimed any authority greater than that granted by 
Parliament l to her father and her brother with the title 
of head of the Church, so that the title, head of the 
Church the giving of which to a woman seemed not 
long ago to be dishonourable and unreasonable was 
more modest and less offensive than its present substi 
tute. Thus politicians, when they presume to meddle 
with sacred things, show that they understand neither 
the words nor the matter of their discourse. 

1 Injunctions given by the queen s 
majesty, A.D. 1559 (Wilkins, Con., 
iv. 1 88) : "The queen s majesty 
being informed that in certain places 
of the realm, sundry of her majesty s 
subjects being called to ecclesiastical 
ministry of the Church, be, by sinister 
persuasion and perverse construction, 
induced to find some scruple in the 
form of an oath which by an act of 
the last Parliament is prescribed to 
be required of divers persons for 
their recognition of their allegiance 
to her majesty, which certainly never 
was ever meant. . . . 

"And further, her majesty for- 
biddeth all manner her subjects to 

give ear or credit to such perverse 
and malicious persons which most 
sinisterly and maliciously labour to 
notify to her loving subjects how, 
by words of the said oath, it may be 
collected that the kings or queens of 
this realm, possessors of the crown, 
may challenge authority and power 
of ministry of divine service in the 
Church, wherein her said subjects be 
much abused by such evil-disposed 
persons. For certainly her majestv 
never doth or will challenge any 
authority than that was challenged 
and lately used by the said noble 
kings of famous memory, kin" Henry 
VIII. and Edward VI." 

( 247 ) 



IN order that foreigners unversed in our affairs may 
understand the present condition of the state, I shall 
now show in a few words wherein, according to the 
acts of Parliament, this spiritual or ecclesiastical supre 
macy, given to this woman, and to the two kings her 
predecessors, chiefly consists. 

In the first place, here are the words of the act of 
Parliament : 1 - 

" Such jurisdictions, privileges, superiorities, and pre 
eminences, spiritual and ecclesiastical, as by any 
spiritual or ecclesiastical power or authority hath 
heretofore been, or may lawfully be, exercised or 
used, for the visitation of the ecclesiastical state and 
persons, and for reformation, order, and correction of 
the same, and of all manner of errors, heresies, schisms, 
abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities, shall for 
ever, by authority of this present Parliament, be united 
and annexed to the imperial crown of this realm." 

" And that your highness, your heirs and successors, 
kings or queens of this realm, shall have full power and 
authority ... to assign, name, and authorise . . . 
such person or persons ... as your majesty . . . shall 
think meet, to exercise . . . under your highness . . . 
all manner of jurisdictions, ... to visit . . . and amend 
all such errors, heresies, schisms, abuses . . . whatso- 

1 i Eliz. c. i, s. 17, 18. 


ever, which by any manner of spiritual or ecclesiastical 
power . . . can or may lawfully be reformed." 

It is enacted also that the clergy may not meet in 
synod unless summoned by the king s writ, nor make 
nor execute any canon, law, or constitution, ordinance 
provincial or other, without the "royal assent and 
licence to make, promulge, and execute such canons, 
. . . upon pain of every one of the said clergy doing con 
trary to this act, and being thereof convict, to suffer 
imprisonment and make fine at the king s will." 1 

No person " shall depart out of the king s dominions 
to or for any visitation, congregation, or assembly for 
religion, but that all such visitations, congregations, 
and assemblies shall be within the king s dominions. " s 

Moreover, all bishops must be made by the royal autho 
rity only, not on the nomination, or by election of any 
other; and the episcopal jurisdiction and authority must 
be held and exercised at the queen s pleasure, received 
from her only, or by authority derived from her majesty. 8 

The queen empowers not only her own bishops and 
ecclesiastical persons to use this their jurisdiction under 
herself in all spiritual things and over all spiritual 
persons ; she empowers laymen as well, making them 
her commissaries or vicars, to exercise every kind of 
spiritual jurisdiction; and appeals are often carried to 
them from the bishops themselves. 

But how complete is the dependence upon her, for all 
their spiritual authority and jurisdiction, of those vicars 
and the bishops themselves, may be seen in their official 
letters; in which it is confessed, to our amazement, that 

1 This clause was enacted first 2 25 Henry VIII. c. 21, s. 20, 

under Henry VIII. 25 Henry VIII. repealed under Philip and Mary, 

c. 19, being the statute of the sub- and revived by the statute of I Eliz. 

mission of the clergy. The act was c. i, s. 8. 

repealed under Philip and Mary, and 3 25 Henry VIII. c. 20, repealed 

now revived by this statute of I Eliz. under Philip and Mary, revived i 

c. i, s. 6. Eliz. c. i, s. 9. See also 8 Eliz. c. i. 


holy orders must be given by no other authority than 
that of the crown. Thus, according to the former legisla 
tion, the king wrote to a certain archbishop, " Inasmuch 
as all authority to declare the law, and all manner of 
jurisdiction, whether ecclesiastical or civil, is derived 
from the royal authority, as it were from the supreme 
head, ... we authorise you by these letters, remaining 
in force during our good pleasure, to confer holy orders 
upon those who are of your diocese. " : The archbishop 
in his turn writing to his clergy, when he had anything 
to command, said, "We, N., by the divine permission, 
archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, suffi 
ciently and duly authorised by the king s majesty;" 
or thus, " "We command you on behalf and in the 

1 These are the terms of the fa 
culties granted by Henry VIII. to 
the bishops. Burnet (iv. 410) has 
printed the faculties of Bonner 
bishop of London, issued Nov. 12, 
1539. Theking begins by saying that 
the royal jurisdiction is the source of 
the ecclesiastical : " Quandoquidem 
omnis jurisdicendi auctoritas atque 
etiam jurisdictio omnimoda, tam ilia 
quse ecclesiastica dicitur quam saecu- 
laris, a regia potentate, velut a supre 
mo capite, et omnium infra regimm 
nostrum magistratuum, fonte et sca- 
turigine, primitus emanavit." The 
king then says that he had made 
Cromwell his vicar - general and 
official principal, but as Cromwell 
had so much to do, and could not 
personally attend to all the matters 
within the king s jurisdiction as 
supreme head, he therefore made 
Bonner another vicar: "Tibi vices 
nostras sub modo et forma in- 
ferius descriptis conmittendas fore, 
teque licentiandum esse decerni- 
mus." Bonner, as the king s vicar, is 
authorised to ordain priests, to collate 
them to benefices, and to institute, 
them on the presentation of others, 
and to make a visitation of the 
diocese. The same doctrine is taught 

in the " Reformat! o Legum,de Officio 
et Jurisdictione." These faculties 
were granted to the other bishops, 
to Gardiner and Tunstall Edward 
VI. walked in the ways of his father; 
and Cranmer s faculties, by which 
he is authorised to hold ordinations, 
may be seen in Wilkins, Concil., iv. 
2. And even at this day the same 
doctrine lives. King William IV., 
in his letters-patent appointing the 
first bishop of Australia, gives to him 
" and his successors, bishops of Aus 
tralia, full power and authority to 
admit into the holy orders of deacon 
and priest respectively any person 
whom he shall," &c. ; and in the 
patents of the other bishops it is said 
that "they may perform all the 
functions peculiar and appropriate 
to the office of bishop " within their 
dioceses. When a bishop was sent 
to India, it was enacted in Parlia 
ment, 53 Geo. III. c. 155, s. 53, 
"that such bishops shall not have or 
use any jurisdiction, or exercise any 
episcopal functions whatsoever, . . . 
but only such jurisdiction and func 
tions as shall or may from time to 
time be limited to him by his majesty, 
by letters -patent under the great seal 
of the United Kingdom." 


name of tlie king, whose representative we are in tins 
matter." 1 

But the very Protestants themselves have become 
long ago ashamed of these most foolish laws ; they have 
attempted to hide the baseness of them from people un 
acquainted with English affairs, by saying that nothing 
is meant by them beyond a declaration that the king or 
queen is supreme over ecclesiastics as well as over lay 
men. But the facts hitherto mentioned remove at once 
this cloak of iniquity, for it is plain that by this law the 
king or queen is supreme, not only in civil affairs, over 
all his or her subjects of every rank, but in the things of 
God also, over ecclesiastical persons, supreme, just as he 
or she is supreme over the civil judges in matters relat 
ing to the public peace and government of the kingdom. 

This is not all their folly ; they say that this spiritual 
jurisdiction is a part of the kingly authority, not granted 
now for the first time, but restored and given back to 
the crown as its ancient rights. 2 This is nothing else 
but saying either that heathen princes who were not 
possessed of that spiritual power were not real kings, or 
that Catholic kings, whether those now reigning in other 
Christian lands, or those who reigned in England before 
the schism, were not true and perfect kings, but kings 
who reigned with diminished rights; or it is saying 
that our Lord made no distinction between the things 


of God and the things of Caesar, or that there is no 
difference between the rights of the king and the rights 
of the priests, between the Church, which is the mystical 
body of Christ, and a secular society; or lastly, between 

1 Wilkins, Concil., iv. 22. These uniting to the imperial crown of 
terms are used by Cranmer, ordering this realm the ancient jurisdictions, 
the destruction of the images of the -authorities, superiorities, and pre- 
saints, Feb. 24, 1548. eminences to the same of right be- 

2 The words of the statute I Eliz. longing and appertaining." Seenotei 
c. i, s. i, are, " For the restoring and on the preceding page. 



those whom the Holy Ghost has made rulers in the 
Church of God and the human institution, which has for 
its immediate end the comforts and repose of this life. 
But we must pass on, and leave these matters in the 
hands of God, who will judge the cause of His Church, 
and make their princes like Oreb and Zeb, Zebee and 
Salmana, who said, "Let us possess the sanctuary of God 
for an inheritance/ 1 

When the queen had appropriated this authority to 
herself and her heirs, abolishing at the same time that 
of the Apostolic See, she took to herself, as the chief 
minister in divine things, the first-fruits and the tithes 
of all spiritual revenues ; 2 in other words, she claimed 
the whole of the first year s profits of every benefice, and 
all the property of the monks and friars which her sister 
had restored. 3 She appointed vicars and commissaries 
in spirituals, provided herself with a special seal to be 
used in ecclesiastical affairs ; the laws made for the 
punishment of heretics 4 and they were much to the 

1 Ps. Ixxxii. 12, 13. 

2 Stow, p. 636. " Queen Elizabeth, 
in this lieu first Parliament, liolden 
at Westminster the 2oth of this 
month of January, expelled the 
Papal supremacy, resumed the first- 
fruits and tenths, repressed the Mass, 
and for the general uniformity of 
her dominions established the Book 
of Common Prayer in the English 
tongue, forbidding all other." 

3 Stow, pp. 638, 639. "In the 
month of July, the old bishops of 
England then living were called and 
examined by certain of the queen s 
majesty s council, where the bishops 
of York, Ely, and London, with 
other to the number of thirteen or 
fourteen, for refusing to take the 
oath touching the queen s supre 
macy and other articles, they were 
deprived from their bishoprics. And 
likewise divers deans, archdeacons, 
parsons, and vicars deprived from 

their benefices, and some committed 
to prison in the Tower, Fleet, Mar- 
shalsea, the King s Bench. Com 
missioners were likewise appointed 
for the establishing of religion 
throughout the w r hole realm. Also 
the houses of religion by queen 
Mary, as the Priory of St. John of 
Jerusalem by Smithfield, the nuns 
and brethren of Sion and Sheen, 
the black friars in Smithfield, the 
friars of Greenwich, were all sup 
pressed : the abbot and monks of 
Westminster were put out, a dean, 
prebends, and canons placed there, 
and so named the College of West 
minster, founded by queen Elizabeth." 
4 i Eliz. c. i, s. 15. "That one 
act and statute made in the first and 
second years of the late king Philip 
and queen Mary, entituled An Act 
for the reviving of three statutes 
made for the punishment of heresies, 
and also the said three statutes men- 

2 5 2 



purpose then were repealed, and no man was to be 
accounted a heretic, and no opinion or proposition to be 
condemned as heretical, unless condemned by the four 
general councils, or at least another council which had 
decided the question by the authority of the Scriptures, 
or, which is the chief point, by the high court of Parlia 
ment. 1 

Finally, the queen decreed a change of religion and 
belief: it was a change wrought according to her will 
and the will of her councillors. She took away the daily 
sacrifice, with the solemn prayers and the administration 
of the sacraments ; she prescribed a new worship, new 
ceremonies, and the prayers in the vulgar tongue ; for 
the most part after the Lutheran fashion, but with one 
exception, the destruction of the sacred images, 2 though 
the legislators, with their ministers and followers, were 
more inclined at the time and afterwards to the Cal- 
vinistic opinions. All this the queen brought about by 

tioned in the said act, and by the 
same act revived, and all and every 
"branches, articles, clauses, and sen 
tences contained in the said several 
acts and statutes, and every of them, 
shall be, from the last day of this 
session of Parliament, deemed and 
remain utterly repealed, void and of 
none effect to all intents and pur 

1 i Eliz. c. i, s. 36. "Provided 
always, and be it enacted, . . . that 
such person or persons to whom 
your highness, your heirs or suc 
cessors, shall hereafter, by letters- 
patent under the great seal of Eng 
land, give authority to have or 
execute any jurisdiction, power, or 
authority spiritual, or to visit, re 
form, order, or correct any errors, 
heresies, schisms, abuses, or enor 
mities by virtue of this act, shall not 
in anywise have authority or power 
to order, determine, or adjudge any 
matter or cause to be heresy, but 
only such as heretofore have been 

determined, ordered, or adjudged to 
be heresy, by the authority of the 
canonical Scriptures, or by the first 
four general councils, or any of them, 
or by any other general council, 
wherein the same was declared 
heresy by the express and plain 
words of the said canonical Scrip 
tures, or such as hereafter shall be 
ordered, judged, or determined to be 
heresy, by the high court of Parlia 
ment of this realm, with the assent 
of the clergy in their convocation, 
anything in this act contained to the 
contrary notwithstanding/ 

2 Stow, p. 640. " On the eve of 
St. Bartholomew, the day and the 
morrow after, &c., were burned in 
Paul s Churchyard, Cheap, and divers 
other places of the city of London, 
all the roods and other images of 
the churches ; in some places the 
copes, vestments, altar-cloths, books, 
banners, sepulchres, and roodlofts 
were burned." 


the help of laymen only, for she was opposed by every 
one of the bishops, who in Parliament are the first who 
give their opinions, and certainly they alone should 
have been listened to in matters of faith all the clergy 
of the province of Canterbury then assembled in convo 
cation in London also refusing their consent. 

But as this nation stands now almost alone in this, 
that heresies and sects of perdition were brought in, not 
as in France, Scotland, Belgium, and other countries, 
through popular tumults, but in a legal way, at the 
commandment of its kings, it may be as well to explain 
here how it was that the queen obtained the consent of 
both Houses of Parliament to the changes she made, for 
without their consent she had not the power to make 
any changes whatever in religion. 




THE English Parliament consists of two houses : that of 
the nobility, namely, the prelates and the lay lords, and is 
called the Upper House ; the other, that of knights, re 
presentatives of counties, and burgesses, representatives 
of cities, of the more important towns, and of the people, 
and is called the Lower House. The election of the 
members of the Lower House, in every county and 
borough, was so managed that those only were elected 
who were ready to make changes in the belief and 
religion of the country, and hence it was that the 
queen had no difficulty in obtaining their consent to 
everything that she proposed to do. 1 Now, in the Upper 
House sat the bishops, all most learned men and most 
faithful confessors, and very many were influenced by 
their eloquence and opinions. With them sat many 
lay peers, who in that very place but three years before, 
in the presence of the Legate of His Holiness, and on 
behalf of the whole realm, made a common profession 
of faith and obedience, and who were now ashamed to 
withdraw from it so soon, at the wish and pleasure of a 
woman. They too were present in the house who so 

1 Butler, Memoirs, i. 272. "Five from among these candidates; a 
candidates were nominated by the measure which, appears to discover 
court to each borough, and three to apprehensions in the court that the 
each county; and by the sheriff s general sense of the people was con- 
authority the members were chosen trary to the Reformation." 



lately had gone as ambassadors to Kome to obtain the 
reconciliation of the kingdom, and they solemnly warned 
the Peers not to apostatise from the faith and com 
munion of Christendom and of their own ancestors, nor 
to allow themselves to be branded with everlasting dis 
grace for levity and inconsistency in matters touching 
their salvation. 1 In consequence of this there was a 
long struggle in the Upper House, and its consent was 
obtained with great difficulty. 2 

The Catholic religion could not have been set aside at 
that time but for the cunning of the queen, who won the 
Peers over to her side : some she flattered, to others she 
made promises, and some she bribed; even their kindred 
were not neglected. One peer was won over by the ex 
pectation of marrying the queen, held out to him by 
Elizabeth herself, 3 and another by the offer of a dis- 

1 Sir Antony Brown, now Viscount 
Montague, according to Caniden, 
(Eliz., p. 36), " acriter instabat mag- 
110 Anglise dedecori esse, si ab Apos- 
tolica Sede, cui nuper se submisse 
reconciliarat mox deficeret. . . . Ma- 
jorein etiani in niodum etiam atque 
etiam. obtestando contendit, ut a 
Romana Sede non secederent, cui 
Cliristianam fidem primum accep- 
tam etperpetuo conservatam debent." 

2 Sir Simonds d Ewes, Journals 
of Parliament, p. 23. " On Satur 
day the 1 8 th day of March [1559] 
the bill for the restoring of the 
supremacy to the imperial crown of 
this realm, and repealing divers 
acts of Parliament made to the con 
trary, with certain provisoes added 
thereunto by the Lords, was read the 
third time : " et conclus. dissentien- 
tibus Archiepiscopo Eboracen., Comite 
Salop., Vicecomite Mountacuto, Epis- 
copo Londin., Episcopo Wintun., Epis- 
copo Wigorn., Episcopo Landavevt <. , 
Episcopo Coven., Episcopo Exon., Epis 
copo Castren., Episcopo Carleol., et Ab 
bas [sic] de Westm., et prcedicta billa 
est commissa attornato et sollicitatori 

regince in Domum Communem de- 

3 This was the earl of Arundel. 
In the " Crudelitatis Calvinianse de 
Morte Comitis Northiimbrise," at the 
end, is the following account of this : 
" Ac primus quidem prsecipuusque 
totius ordinis qui authoritate suaprse- 
cipue hocefl ecit dux fait Norfolcien- 
sis, qui paucis post annis, ab illis ipsis 
quibus ea in re gratificatus fuerat, 
capite fuit perridicule mulctatus ; 
cujus etiam nunc filius ac hceres 
carceribus tenetur. Socer autem qui 
ilium ad hoc induxerat, ambitione 
quadam potiundi reginse matrimonio 
sibi promisso, despectus postea ac 
illusus, ajreque alieno ac infamia 
exhaustus contemptibilissime mori- 
tur. Coeiera nobilitas quid exinde sit 
passa, et quid in posterum passura 
videatur, nisi Deus misertus i uerit, 
universus orbis fere videt ac loqui 
tur." The earl repented in his later 
days ; for (Life of the Countess of 
Arundel, p. 180) " he was so happy 
as to be reconciled sometime before 
his death to the Catholic Church, 
and to receive the holy sacraments 


pensation in the matter of marriage, 1 which he could 
not so easily obtain from the Pope. z\nd yet after all, 
the schismatics obtained their end against the Catholics 
only by three votes. 2 Elizabeth gained her object, 
neglected her suitor, and shamefully mocked him. She 
would remain a virgin, she said, and on her tombstone 
should be written, " Here lieth Elizabeth, queen for 
many years, and all her life a virgin/ 3 

The other great nobleman, the duke of Norfolk, 
whom she won over by her blandishments, she after 
wards persecuted in many ways, had him falsely 
accused, and then beheaded. That was, as many said, 
the just judgment of God upon him ; indeed, a grave 
and pious London matron is said to have visited the 
duke, and to have spoken to him with great frankness. 
"When your grace," she said, "gave your vote 
formerly given, and as you were bound to give it, for 
the defence of the Church and the Catholic faith unto 
heretics and for the ruin of religion, you had probably 
forgotten that you and your family, brought to the very 

and rites thereof by the persuasion on an active opposition to it from 

and procurement of the Lord Lumley, the duke of Norfolk and the earl of 

his son-in-law." Arundel, whose daughter he had 

1 Sir Simonds d Ewes, Journals, married ; but both voted for the bill, 
p. 25. House of Lords, March 21, and the duke used all his proxies, 
1559. "At which hour the lord- which were numerous, in its favour, 
keeper and divers other lords being It passed the Commons without a 
set, the bill for ratification of the division." 

marriage between the duke of Nor- 3 Stow, p. 637. Elizabeth, in answer 

folk and the Lady Margaret, now his to the petition" of her first Parliament, 

wife, and for the assurance of certain said, " And in the end this shall be 

lands for her jointure, with a new for me sufficient, that a marble stone 

proviso added by the Commons, con- shall declare that a queen having 

clusa est, being read tertia vice dis- reigned such a time, lived and died 

sentientibus Arcliiepiscopo Eboracen., a virgin." So also in a letter to the 

Episcopis Londin., Winton., Land- emperor (Burnet, vi. 442) she says, 

aven., Castren, Carleol, et Abbate de " Non invenimus in nobis volunta- 

Westm" tern ullam deserendi hanc solitariam. 

2 Butler, Histor. Memoirs, vol. i. vitam, sedpotius, juvanteDeo, liben- 
chap. xxiii. " The bill was finally tern animi inductionem in eadem 
carried by a majority of three voices, diutius porro vita perse verandi." 
The Catholics had particularly relied 


brink of ruin by the heretics, had been, by queen Mary 
of most blessed memory, saved and raised to its present 
rank : well ! because you have done this, loving the 
praise of men more than the glory of God, God will 
punish you, and the rest of the old nobility who have 
had a share in this sin, by means of these very heretics 
and upstarts." 

During the discussion on the supremacy, the Peers 
said, among other things, that they could not take the 
oath with a good conscience; so she and this helped 
her exceedingly took care to make an exception in 
favour of the lay lords, provided they made the taking 
of the oath compulsory on the bishops at least, the 
ecclesiastics, and some others. Thereupon many of the 
Peers, thinking themselves safe under this provision, 
cared very little for the bishops and the clergy, and left 
them to the mercy of this impious legislation. This is 
the result whenever divine things are handled in human 
and secular assemblies which have not received from God 
the promise of the spirit of truth, judgment, and justice. 

It is said of Henry VIII. , when he resolved to seize 
the possessions of the monasteries and of the religious, 
that he easily obtained his object in Parliament from the 
lay peers and the prelates, who thought that they had 
but scanty interest in any legislation touching monastic 
houses and religious persons ; l accordingly the regular 

1 Harpsfield, bk. iii. p. 142. could not do long after, for all the 
"Woe ! therefore, even for very fair and flattering promises made 
civil and politic causes, to the said unto them, and for all that many of 
prelate [Cranmer] that made the them to their great charges and 
lewd lying sermon for the destruc- impoverishment procured and pur- 
tion of the said abheys. Woe. I there- chased the continuance of their 
fore, to them that procured the spoil houses under the great seal, as I 
and eversion of them. Woe ! be even have heard some of them report, 
t0 8 the great abbots themselves that only they got the benefit that Poly- 
winked at the matter, yea, and gave pliemus promised to Ulisses, that is, 
their consent to the suppressing of he would be so gracious and favour- 
the lesser, thinking to keep and pre- able to him that he would spare 
serve their own still, which they him and eat him last of all his fol- 




[BOOK iv. 

clergy, abandoned by the lay lords and by tlic bishops, 
speedily became the prey of the tyrant. Afterwards, 
indeed, and especially in the Parliaments of Elizabeth, 
God permitted it, and it was easily brought about when 
the bishops and all the clergy had been attacked, and 
the ecclesiastics being for the most part abandoned to 
the rapacity of a woman, by the lay lords that the lay 
lords themselves in their turn also should be abandoned, 
in reparation for the wrong which they had done before, 
and that religion should be most shamefully trodden 
under foot. We ourselves have already seen, and our 
children will also more clearly see, and wonder at, the 
chastisements which have befallen the lay lords for their 

A law 1 was now made that on a certain day, namely, 
the feast of St. John the Baptist, A.D. 1559, every one 
who said Mass, every one who heard Mass, every one 
who procured the celebration of the divine office in the 

lowers. Rut yet Ulisses by policy 
got himself out of clanger, but these 
men could by no means provide but 
tliut their abbeys were at length 
eaten and devoured as well as the 
lesser. All those which being under 
the clear yearly value of two hun 
dred pounds, or not above, were 
given to the king by act of Parlia 
ment. But as for the residue, they 
came to the king s hands by one 
means or other, and that without 
any act of Parliament at all." 

1 i Kli/. c. 2. This is called the 
Act of Uniformity. 

Grindal, writing from London, 
May 23, 1559, to Conrad Hubert 
(Zurich Letters, ii. No. 8), says : 
" Now at last, by the blessing of 
God, during the prorogation of 
Parliament, there has been published 
a proclamation to banish the Pope 
and his jurisdiction altogether, and 
to restore religion to that form 
which we had in the time of Ed 
ward VI. If any bishops or other 

beneficcd persons shall decline to 
take the oath of abjuration of the 
authority of the bishop of Rome, 
they are to be deprived of every 
ecclesiastical function and deposed. 
No one after the feast of St. John 
the Baptist next ensuing, may cele 
brate Mass without subjecting him 
self to a most heavy penalty. It is 
therefore commonly supposed that 
almost all the bishops, and also 
many other beneficed persons, will 
renounce their bishoprics and their 
functions, as being ashamed after so 
much tyranny and cruelty exercised 
under the banners of the Pope, and 
the obedience so lately sworn to 
him, to be again brought to a re 
cantation, and convicted of manifest 
perjury. We are labouring under a 
great dearth of godly ministers ; for 
many who have fallen off in this 
persecution, are now become Papists 
in heart ; and those who had been 
heretofore, so to speak, moderate 
Papists, are now the most obstinate." 


ancient way, every one who administered any sacrament 
according to the Bom an rite, was to bo heavily fined ; 
that is, the first offence against that law was to Le visited 
by a fine of one hundred marks, 1 and imprisonment for 
six months if it be not paid. 

For the second conviction under the statute the fine 
was to be four hundred marks, and if not paid, the im 
prisonment was to be for one year; and for the third 
conviction the penalty was imprisonment for life, and 
the forfeiture of all goods and chattels. 2 

The result of this act was that on the day fixed the 
public celebration of Mass ceased throughout the whole 
realm. But as the bishops, with one exception, 3 refused 
to assent to this iniquity, as I have already said, and 
to say that they believed in their consciences that the 
queen alone was the supreme governor of the Church 
under Christ, they were soon after deprived of their 
dignities, and committed either to prison or to the 
custody of divers persons ; so that they arc now, all 
of them, worn out by the weariness of their miserable 
treatment. 4 

1 .Ducentos aurcos. This penal still confined in the Tower, and arc 
legislation seems to have moved going on in their old way." Again 
Jewell to great merriment, for lie to Bullinger, Feb. 9 (ibid., 44) ; 
thus writes to Peter Martyr from "Some few of the bishops who 
London, March 5, 1560 (Zurich Let- were furious in the late Marian 
ters, i. No. 30): "There is nothing, times, cannot as yet, in so short a 
however, of which they [the Catho- time, for very shame return to their 
lies] have any right to complain ; senses. They are therefore confined 
for the Mass has never been more in the Tower lest their contagion 
highly prized within rny memory; should infect others." Cox bishop of 
each ^being now valued, to every Ely, writing to Peter Martyr, Aug. 5, 
individual spectator, at not less than 1562 (ibid., 49), says: " The heads 
two hundred crowns." of our Popish clergy are still kept 

2 i Eli/, c. 2. s. 9-13. in confinement. They are treated, 

3 This was Antony Kitchen, con- indeed, with kindness, but relax 
secrated May 3, 1545, in the lifetime nothing of their Popery. Others 
of Henry VIII. and of Cranmer, and are living at large, scattered about 
without Bulls. in different parts of the kingdom, 

^ 4 Jewell, writing to Peter Martyr, but without any function, unless 
Feb. 7, 1562 (Zurich Letters, i. No. perhaps where they may be sowing 
43); savs j The Marian, bishops are the seeds of impiety in secret." 




To preserve the names of these illustrious confessors 
from oblivion, I give them here. In the first place 
stands Nicholas l archbishop of York, and shortly before 
this lord chancellor of England, Edmund 2 bishop of 
London, Cuthbert 3 bishop of Durham, John 4 bishop of 
Winchester, Thirlby 5 bishop of Ely, Turberville 6 bishop 
of Exeter, Bourne 7 bishop of Bath and Wells, Pole 8 
bishop of Peterborough, Bayne 9 bishop of Lichfield, Cuth 
bert 10 bishop of Chester, Oglethorpe 11 bishop of Carlisle. 
Thomas Gold well, 12 bishop of St. Asaph, in great sanctity 
and full of days, however, lived in Home for six-and- 

1 Nicholas Heath. See bk. ii. chap, 
ii. p. 179, note 3. 

2 Edmund Boimer. See bk. n. 
chap. ii. p. 179, note 2. 

3 Cuthbert Tunstall. See bk. i. 
chap. x. p. 64, note 3. He was now 
committed to the custody of Parker 
at Lambeth Palace, where he died 
Nov. 1 8, 1559. 

4 Dr. John White. See bk. ii. 
chap. v. p. 208, note i. 

5 Thomas Thirlby, born at Cam 
bridge, where he was educated, and 
became master of Trinity Hall. He 
was bishop of Westminster while 
that see lasted, then of Norwich and 
of Ely. He was put under the care 
of Parker at Lambeth Palace, where 
he died Aug. 26, A.D. 1570. 

6 James Turberville, educated at 
New College, Oxford, consecrated 
Sept. 8, 1555. It is said that he 
was allowed to live in peace with 
his relatives. 

7 Gilbert Bourne was fellow of 
All Souls, Oxford, and archdeacon of 
London, consecrated April i, 1554. 
The see had been stripped almost 
bare, but he recovered some of the 
estates. Deprived by Elizabeth, he 
was consigned to the custody of 
Gregory Dodds, dean of Exeter, and 
died at Silverton Sept. 10, 1569. 

8 David Pole was fellow of All 
Souls, dean of the Arches, arch 
deacon of Derby and of Salop, con 
secrated bishop of Peterborough Aug. 

15, 1537. Heylyn (Hist. Reform., 
115) says "he died upon one of his 
own farms in a good old age ; " but 
according to Le Neve, " he died at 
London in June 1568," and he had 
held his preferment during the reign 
of Edward VI. 

9 Ralph Bayne, born in Yorkshire 
and educated at St. John s College, 
Cambridge. He was for some time 
professor of Hebrew in the Uni 
versity of Paris. Consecrated Nov. 
1 8, 1554, he was deprived by Eliza 
beth in June 1559, and died at 
Islington Nov. 18 of the same year. 
His body was laid in the church of 
St. Dunstan. 

10 Cuthbert Scott, educated at 
Christ s College, Cambridge. Eliza 
beth put him in the Fleet prison, 
but he made his escape and went to 
Louvain, where he died. 

11 Owen Oglethorpe, president of 
Magdalene College, Oxford, A.D. 
1535, and canon of Windsor in 1540. 
Having resigned the presidency of 
Magdalene Sept. 27, 1552, he was 
again elected president Oct. 31, 
1553, and in the next year was 
made dean of Windsor. He was 
consecrated bishop of Carlisle Aug. 
15, 1557, and deprived in 1559. He 
died the same year, Dec. 31, and 
was buried in St. Dunstan s-in-the- 

12 Goldwell. See bk. ii. chap. iv. 
p. 203, note 3. 


twenty years afterwards. It is not long since lie went 
to liis rest in our Lord by a most blessed and holy 
death. To these, on account of his unvarying constancy 
and partnership in bonds, must be added Feckenham 1 
abbot of Westminster, who having confessed a good 
confession, in this very year slept in our Lord in peace. 

The better part of the clergy followed in the footsteps 
of their prelates ; very many of them, high dignitaries 
in the Church, were either thrown into prison or banished 
the realm, while heretics usurped their dignities and 
filled their places. Very many religious also, of divers 
orders, fied the country. Three monasteries 2 of men 
and women departed, leaving not a single member 
behind. Many persons too of high rank, of both sexes, 
followed their example, even to bonds and the loss of 
their possessions. The very flower of the two universities, 
Oxford and Cambridge, was carried away, as it were, by 
a storm, and scattered in foreign lands. a Some three 
hundred persons, of all conditions, went away at once 
into different parts of Europe, but especially to the 
Belgian universities, where a most abundant harvest is 
gathered, to be sown again in the barren lands of Eng 
land, there to grow at last, so we hope, to be the salva 
tion of all its people. 4 

1 Feckenham. See bk. ii. chap, have so torn up by the roots all that 

iv. p. 198, note i. Peter Martyr had so prosperously 

2 The Friars Observant from Green- planted that they have reduced the 
wich, the Carthusians from Rich- vineyard of the Lord into a wilder- 
mend, and the Brigettine nuns from ness. You would scarcely believe 
gi oiu so much desolation could have been 

3 Jewell, writing to Bullinger, effected in so short a time." 
May 22, 1 559 (Zurich Letters, i. 14), 4 The queen s visitors appeared 

says : " Our universities are so de- in Oxford about the end of June 

pressed and ruined that at Oxford 1559, removed the Catholics, and 

there are scarcely two individuals put the heretics in their places. 

who think with us, and even they The result was that in the act of 

are so dejected and broken in spirit 1560, according to Wood (Annals, 

that they can do nothing. That ad an. 1561), "was none in divinity, 

despicable friar Soto and another and but one in the civil law, three 

Spanish monk, I know not who, in physic, and eight in arts, and in 



[BOOK iv. 

Some of these wrote books both in Latin and in Eng 
lish, wherein they clearly and vigorously defended many 
doctrines of the Catholic religion against the heretics. 1 
Among these a distinguished place is occupied by Nicholas 
Harpsfield who in prison wrote, among other works, an 
admirable book against the centuriators of Magdeburg, 
publishing it, however, in the name of Cope 2 Nicolas 
Sander, 3 and they are still living William Allen 4 

the act this year [1561] not one in 
divinity, law, or physic. The students 
also were so poor and beggarly that 
many of them were forced this and 
the year following to obtain licence 
under the commissary s seal to re 
quire the alms of well-disposed 

1 One of the articles issued by Grin- 
dal previous to his proposed visitation 
of the province of Canterbury in 1576, 
being the eighteenth of Elizabeth, 
is as follows : " Whether there be 
any person or persons, ecclesiastical 
or temporal, within your parish, or 
elsewhere within this diocese, that 
of late have retained or kept in their 
custody, or that read, sell, utter, 
disperse, carry, or deliver to others, 
any English books, set forth of late 
years at Lou vain, or in any other 
place beyond the seas, by Harding, 
Dorman, Allen, Saunders, Stapleton, 
Marshall, Bristow, or any of them, 
or by any other English Papist, either 
against the queen s majesty s supre 
macy in matters ecclesiastical, or 
against true religion, and Catholic 
doctrine nowreceivedand established 
by common authority within this 
realm ; and what their names and 
surnames are." Art. 41 in Grindal s 
Remains, p. 169. 

2 See before, bk. ii. chap. iv. p. 
201, note 5. The book referred to 
is " Dialogi Sex contra Summi Pon- 
tificatus Monastics Vitse Sanctorum, 
Sacrarum Imaginarum Oppugna- 
tores et Pseudomartyres. Antver- 
pie, 1566." 

Alan Cope was born in London, 
and became fellow of Magdalene Col 

lege, Oxford, in 1549. He went into 
banishment in 1560, and proceeded 
to Rome, where he was made one of 
the canons of St. Peter s. He was 
a friend of Harpsfield, who sent to 
him the book referred to in the text 
in order to have it published. Alan 
Cope, because his friend was in 
prison, and because it was most cer 
tain that his hardships would be 
multiplied, even if his death might 
not be hastened, gave his own name 
to the book, and hid the name of the 
author under the letters 

A. H. L. N. II. E. V. E. A. C., 
that is, Auctor liujus libri, Nicolaus 
Harpesfeldus. Eum vero edidit Ala- 
nus Copus. Alan Cope died in Rome 
A.D. 1580. 

3 The author of the book to 
which this continuation of Rishton is 

4 Cardinal Allen, whose name is 
in benediction, was born in Lanca 
shire, and educated at Oxford, where 
he became principal of St. Mary 
Hall, a place in the gift of Oriel 
College, of which he was one of the 
fellows. On the death of Mary he 
withdrew to Lou vain, and on his 
return to England denounced the 
practice of the Catholics who fre 
quented the heretical services to 
avoid the penalties. He went abroad 
again, and founded the College of 
Douai and Rheims, being thereby 
the founder of the English missions, 
and another St. Gregory to this 
country. He was made canon of 
Cambrai, then of Rheims. He 
shrunk from accepting the dignity of 
the cardinalate under Gregory XIII., 


and Thomas Stapleton, 1 by whose labours their country 
men who had been deceived are returning daily in un 
numbered crowds, by the grace of Christ, into the 
bosom of the Church, 

but had to yield to Sixtns V., who 
raised him to that dignity by the 
title of St. Martin in Montibus, Aug. 
7, 1587. In 1589 he was appointed 
archbishop of Mechlin, but he never 
took possession of the see. He died 
in Rome, Oct. 16, 1594. 

1 Thomas Stapleton, born at Hen- 
field, Sussex, in the month and year 
of the martyrdom of Sir Thomas 
More, educated first at Canterbury, 
then at Winchester and New Col 

lege, Oxford, of which house he was 
a fellow A.D. 1554. He was a pre 
bendary of Chichester when Eliza 
beth came to the throne, and, forced 
to quit the country, took refuge in 
Lou vain. He was for some time 
catechist at Douai, but, recalled to 
Lou vain, he was made regius pro 
fessor of theology and canon of St. 
Peter s there, where he died Oct. 
12, 1598, having lived for two-and- 
forty years in exile for the faith. 





BESIDE the two most ancient universities already spoken 
of, abounding once in learned men, especially in theo 
logians, but now, as in days of heresy, merely the nursing 
mothers of grammarians and preachers of novelties, 
England possessed, in London, 1 very honourable schools, 
in which for the most part the sons of princes, noblemen, 
and of the more wealthy of the people, studied the 
statute and common law. Out of these schools generally 
come those who administer justice in the courts, and 
manage the affairs of the kingdom men, if any, prudent, 
grave, and honoured. These so hated the change of 
religion, foreseeing the dangers into which it would bring 
the state, that very many of them, at the time and 
afterwards for they cherished the faith and the ancient 
tradition were removed from the administration of 
justice and of public affairs. Their places were filled, 
not indeed by heretics, for among the lawyers heretics 

1 The Third University of Eng- torum, which are commonly called 

land, by G[eorge] B[uck], knight, Inns of Court and Inns of Chancery. 

London, 1631, at the end of Stow s . . . And because that by ancient 

Chronicle, chap. ix. " Now follow custom and by old orders of the 

in their order the colleges, houses, Houses of Court and Chancery, all 

or inns of the professors of our laws those which were admitted into 

of England, who have within and these houses were and ought to be 

about the city fourteen houses, which gentlemen, and that of three descents 

our judicious Cam den styleth dis- at the least, ... for no man can be 

creetly colleges, collegia juris consul- made a gentleman but by his father." 


were very few, but by men who submitted to Csesar and 
went with the times, giving the second place to God. 
In all ranks they who did so were many, and they 
proved more ruinous to the state than the heretics 

Of the three parties into which Englishmen might be 
divided, one party was at the time not so very much 
given to heresy; it neither desired the change of religion 
nor approved of it after it was made, and it liked it 
still less afterwards when it had tasted of its fruits. 
For beside the very large number of the nobility, of 
which I have spoken before, the greater part of the 
country gentlemen was unmistakably Catholic ; so also 
were the farmers throughout the kingdom, and in that 
kingdom they are an honourable and wealthy people. 
They all hated the heresy. Not a single county except 
those near London and the court, and scarcely any 
towns except those on the sea-coast, willingly accepted 
the heresy ; and even in those places the heretics were 
the lazy and the luxurious young men, bankrupts and 
spendthrifts, women laden with sins, and people of that 

We all observed when we were young, especially in 
the universities, that persons fell more readily into 
heresy if they were troublesome to their masters, dis 
obedient to parents and superiors, faithless to their 
lords, or given to any other grave sin. Putting these 
aside, though the others were almost all Catholic at 
heart, nevertheless they thought they might to some 
extent outwardly obey the law, and yield to the will of 
the queen ; if in so doing there was any sin, that must 
be laid at the queen s door, not at theirs, for they were 
of opinion that the straits they were in somehow or 
other might be held to excuse them. 

This opinion was adopted also by the lower clergy, 


simple and parisli priests, not a few canons of cathedral 
or collegiate churches, who in their hearts hated the 
heresy, and for a time, listening to the voice of conscience, 
refrained from the use of the new service. So general 
was this, that after the day appointed by the statute on 
which the true sacrifice was to cease and the false rites 
were to begin, many churches throughout the kingdom 
remained shut for some months ; for the old priests 
would not willingly use the schismatical service, and the 
new ministers were not yet numerous enough to serve 
so many places. 1 

Before long, the queen, upon whom fell the care of all 
the churches, held a visitation, 2 and made inquiries 
touching the beneficed clergy who on the appointed 
day had not adopted in their parishes the parliamentary 
rites ; thereupon many of these, fearing the loss of their 
goods and of their benefices, submitted. In the place 
of those who refused to conform she put ministers of 
the new creation, who were to discharge the duties 
thereof. She also compelled the people to frequent the 
churches as before, and according to the act, 3 inflicted 
a fine of one shilling upon every one who should be 
absent on holy days. And thus by force or fraud it 

1 Jewell to Peter Martyr, Aug. I, Burnet (Hist. Reform., v. 533, ed. 
1559 (Zurich Letters, ist series, No. Pocock), from whom Wilkins 
16): "Now that religion is every- (Concil., iv. 193) has copied it. 
where changed, the Mass priests Those visitors, all except one, being 
absent themselves altogether from laymen, received from the queen 
public worship, as if it were the poAver to deprive the old priests, 
greatest impiety to have anything in and to put in their places men who 
common with the people of God." would conform to the new religion. 

2 The injunctions of the queen That commission was signed on the 
may be seen in Wilkins, Concil., very day, June 24, 1559, on which 
iv. 182, and the articles of inquiry, the Missal and the Breviary were to 
ibid., p. 189. Among the latter is be superseded by the Book of Com- 
the following : " Whether you know mon Prayer. 

any man in your parish secretly or 3 i Eliz. c. 2, s. 14. "Twelve 
in unlawful conventicles say or hear pence to be levied by the church- 
Mass, or any other service prohibited wardens of the parish, ... of the 
by the law." The commission of goods, lands, and tenements of suck 
the northern visitors is given by offender, by way of distress." 



came to pass that the largest portion of the Catholics 
yielded by degrees to their enemies, and did not refuse 
from time to time publicly to enter the schismatical 
churches to hear sermons therein, and to receive com 
munion in those conventicles. 

At the same time they had Mass said secretly in their 
own houses by those very priests who in church publicly 
celebrated the spurious liturgy, and sometimes by others 
who had not defiled themselves with heresy ; yea, and 
very often in those disastrous times were on one and the 
same clay partakers of the table of our Lord and of the 
table of devils, that is, of the blessed Eucharist and the 
Calvinistic supper. Yea, what is still more marvellous 
and more sad, sometimes the priest saying Mass at home, 
for the sake of those Catholics whom he knew to be 
desirous of them, carried about him Hosts consecrated 
according to the rite of the Church, with which he com 
municated them at the very time in which he was giving 
to other Catholics more careless about the faith the bread 
prepared for them according to the heretical rite. 1 

1 The Lives of Philip Howard and 
Anne Dacres, his Wife, p. 170. " Be 
fore the promulgation of the Coun 
cil of Trent s declaration concerning 
the unlawfulness of being present at 
the Protestant service, sermons and 
the like, here in England, the Lady 
Monteagle was accustomed to have 
Protestant service read to her by a 
chaplain in her house, and after 
wards to hear Mass said privately by 
a priest. But as soon as she under 
stood the unlawfulness of this prac 
tice, she would never be present at 
the Protestant service any more. 
And once urged by the duke of 
Norfolk, with whom she lived a 
while before her death, and at whose 
house she died, to do something con 
trary to the profession of her faith, 
though she much esteemed and re 

spected him, yet her answer was so 
sound and resolute that he never 
mentioned the like any more, but 
gave her full liberty to have all the 
assistance desired before and at her 
death. Wherein she was more happy 
than her daughter the duchess, who 
dying not long before her in child 
bed, though she desired to have been 
reconciled by a priest, who for that 
end was conducted into the garden, 
yet could not have access unto her, 
either by reason of the duke s vigi 
lance to hinder it, or at least of his 
continual presence in the chamber 
at the time." Fr. Persons also, in 
"A Briefe Apologie," p. 2, speaks 
of the "division of opinions about 
going to the heretical churches and 
services, which most part of Catho- 
likes did follow for many yeares." 


I write tliis that other nations, made wise by the 
things they see among us, may learn how heresies begin 
and grow, and be on their guard in time against pesti 
lences of this kind. 

Meanwhile the queen and her ministers considered 
themselves most fortunate in that those who clung to 
the ancient faith, though so numerous, publicly ac 
cepted, or by their presence outwardly sanctioned, in 
some way, the new rites which they had prescribed. 
They did not care so much about the inward belief of 
these men, or if they did, they thought it best to dis 
semble for a time. They were not a little pleased that 
even priests were found who did not shrink from the 
new service ; for they were at first afraid that they would 
not be able to persuade them to accept it, contrary to 
the example and commandment of their bishops and the 
voice of their own conscience. The new ministers were 
not enough ; more than thirty thousand parishes must 
be supplied. 1 And they thought it would bring them 
into discredit if the churches should for the most part 
be suddenly shut, and all divine service interrupted ; 
perhaps, too and this is peculiar to all heretics 
they preferred at first, the more easily to deceive the 
people, the services of true priests to those of the 
false. 2 

1 Rishton has here repeated a popu- ist series, No. 35), says, "Many of 
lar misconception about the number our parishes have no clergyman, and 
of parishes in England and Wales, some dioceses are without a bishop. 
It is probable that the number of And out of that very small num- 
parish churches never exceeded half ber who administer the sacraments 
that sum, and that the estimate in throughout this great country, there 
the " Douai Diary," p. 93, may be is hardly one in a hundred who is 
correct, namely, that the number of both able and willing to preach the 
parish churches was 9285. But Si- Word of God." Jewell to Martyr, 
mon Fish, in his " Supplication for Nov. 6, 1560 (ibid., No. 38) : " We 
Beggars," said that there were "52,000 are only wanting in preachers, and of 
parish churches " in England. these there is a great and alarming 

2 Thomas Lever, writing to Bui- scarcity. The schools also are en- 
linger, July 10, 1 560 (Zurich Letters, tirely deserted." 



It was thus tliat these things were done in England, 
and soon after, too, in those parts of Ireland which recog 
nised the queen s authority, where in the same way she 
laid the yoke of heresy on the people against their con 
sciences, for the people of that country are before all 
things Catholics. 1 

1 Renehan, Collections on Irish 
Church. History, p. 12. "When 
Elizabeth issued a conge-d elire for 
the election of Adam Lofthouse, the 
chapter of Armagh dispersed them 
selves throughout the country, and 
the dean could not find a sufficient 
number to comply with the injunc 
tion. Nay, to the end of his life, and 
for years afterwards, there could not 
be found in except a few of the 
large towns more than ten or fifteen 
places through the entire province 
of Ulster, either persons to attend, 
or a minister of any kind to perform, 
the Protestant service. The conse 
quence was, the churches fell into 

decay, and the parsons in after-times 
called for Parliament aid to repair 
them. When Elizabeth issued a com 
mission to inquire into the ecclesi 
astical state of Ireland, there could 
scarcely be found a church or an 
officiating clergyman. The Catholic 
priests were ejected i rom their 
churches, many of them preferred to 
say Mass for their people in private 
places to exposing themselves to im 
prisonment or death ; on the other 
hand, very few Irishmen abandoned 
their religion, and the inferior bene 
fices were not sufficiently tempting 
for the English apostates." 

( 270 ) 





MEANWHILE the governor of tlie Church applies herself 
to the creation of new bishops and clergy of her sect. 1 
In the distribution of offices and ecclesiastical rank, and 
in the very form of government, the queen paid no heed 
to the Zuinglian or Calvinistic model, nor indeed did 
she accurately copy that of the Lutherans ; but she 
wished to be regarded as one that was more of the 
Lutheran than of any other heresy, not only in ceremo 
nial, but also in her way of believing. She pretended 
to a certain moderation ; for as she had been considered 
a Catholic not long before, she was not willing at once 
to appear as a heretic of the worst kind. Accordingly 
that seditious assembly, which is called the Consistory, 
and those degrees or ministries of elders, ministers, and 
the rest, she put on one side. But whether it was her 
own act or the result of the advice of others, she resolved 

1 Jewell to Simler, Nov. 2, 1559 to remain at the bottom. Those 
(Zurich Letters, ist series, No. 22) : oily, shaven, portly hypocrites we 
As to your expressing your hopes have sent back to Rome, whence we 
that our bishops will be consecrated first impelled them; for we require 
without any superstitious and offen- our bishops to be pastors, labourers, 
sive ceremonies, you mean, I suppose, and watchmen. And that this may 
without oil, without the chrism, the more readily be brought to pass, 
without the tonsure. And you are the wealth of the bishops is now 
not mistaken ; for the sink would diminished and reduced to a reason- 
indeed have been emptied to no pur- able amount/ &c. 
pose if we had suffered these dregs 


that it would be more for the honour of her spiritual 
prelates, more for the splendour of her temporal king 
dom, and lastly, more for the security of the sect, that 
the clergy she was instituting should, according to the 
arrangements of the old Church, consist of archbishops, 
bishops, priests, and even deacons for they allow no 
order lower than this. 

In the same way the cathedral and collegiate churches 
were to have, as before, provosts, deans, archdeacons, 
chancellors, canons, and other officers, according to the 
custom of each place. All these men were to retain the 
titles of the ancient dignities and honours, the posses 
sions of the old clergy, and almost all the privileges 
which they had both in Church and State. Moreover, 
the religious woman made an effort to have Keligious of 
her belief, for she asked that illustrious confessor the 
abbot of Westminster l not to allow his monks to go 
away because of the change, and to assure them of her 
kindly feelings towards the monastery ; that she wished 
them to remain there, and to pray for her, celebrating 
divine service according to the order of her laws. But 
those good men saw no reason why they should forsake 
the rule of St. Benedict to keep that of Calvin. 

The queen is in the habit of boasting before strangers 
and the foreign ambassadors that the clergy of her sect 
are held in honour, and are not mere starvelings like 
those of Geneva, and other Churches of the kind, not so 
well ordered as hers ; and that she had not gone so far 
from the faith of other princes and of her own ancestors 
as many think. The better to keep up this fraud, she 
retained for some years on the table, which she had set 
up in the place of the altar, in her chapel, two wax 

1 Stow, p. 628. "The 2 ist of stalled, and took possession of the 

November [1556], John Fecknam, same; and fourteen monks more 

late dean of Paul s in London, was received the habit with him that 

made abbot of Westminster, was day of the Order of St. Benet." 


candles, which were never lighted, with a silver crucifix 
between them. 1 And then in order to please the 
Catholics, and to impose the more easily upon foreigners, 
she used to say from time to time that she was forced, 
net by her own convictions, but by the clamours of her 
subjects, to make a change of religion, but that she had 
practised great moderation in making it. 

Let us return to the principal question. She gave 
away the ecclesiastical dignities and offices to Luther 
ans and Calvinists, but more especially to the latter. 2 
They had come from Savoy and other countries, into 
which they had fled, to divide the spoils. They came 
with the utmost speed, who not long before, after the 

1 Jewell, writing to Peter Martyr 
from London, Nov. 16, 1559 (Zurich 
Letters, ist series, No. 24), says : 
"That little silver cross, of ill-omened 
origin, still maintains its place in the 
queen s chapel. Wretched me ! this 
thing will soon be drawn into a pre 
cedent." Then, Jan. 6, 1560, Samp 
son writes to the same person (ibid., 
Let. 27): "0 my father! what can 
I hope for, when the ministry of the 
"Word is banished from court? While 
the crucitix is allowed, with lights 
burning before it, the altars indeed 
are removed, and images also,through- 
out. the kingdom, the crucifix and 
candles are retained at court alone." 
Parkhurst, Protestant bishop of Nor 
wich, writing to Bullinger, April 26, 
1563 (ibid., No. 5), says : "I wrote 
you word that the cross, wax candles, 
and candlesticks had been removed 
from the queen s chapel ; but they 
were shortly after brought back 
again, to the great grief of the godly. 
The candles heretofore were lighted 
every day, but now not at all." In 
a letter to Rodolph Gualter, March 
4, 1568, Parkhurst gives this farther 
account of the crucifix : " About the 
beginning of November, a certain 
youth, under the influence of great 
zeal for God, entered the queen s 
chapel, and threw down on the 

ground, with great force, the golden 
cross, together with the images con 
nected with it : then stamping on it 
with his feet, he broke it in pieces, 
in the sight of all who were assem 
bled for common prayer, for it was 
done publicly. From that time no 
cross has been seen there ; it was 
abolished, and it will for ever be 
abolished as a mischievous thing." 

Mr. Gorham, who translated and 
published this letter in his "Re 
formation Gleanings," p. 435, has 
softened the fierce language of the 
Protestant bishop, which, however, 
he has given in a note: "Abiit et 
abitura est in perpetuum in malain 
crucem." Heylyn (Hist. Reform., p. 
124) gives a more probable account 
of the destruction of the crucifix, 
wrought by the queen s fool " at the 
solicitation of Sir Francis Knolles, 
the queen s near kinsman by the 
Careys, and one who openly ap 
peared in favour of the schism at 

* Horn to Rodolph Gualter, Aug. 
10, 1576 (Zurich Letters, ist series, 
No. 129): " As she has always abomi 
nated Popery from her infancy, so 
also will she never admit Lutheran- 
ism, which is a great disturber of 



fashion of Calvin, hated the proud and antichristian 
prelates with their domineering authority; these men 
having usurped the honours and the goods of the Church, 
behaved themselves more violently, more tyrannically, 
more greedily, and more insolently than the true owners 
could have done or we have imagined. They forgot the 
form of prayers and the plan of government to which 
they had been accustomed in Geneva, and which they 
had promised their teachers there to introduce into 
England, submitting themselves like slaves to the 
supremacy and directions of the queen, 1 for that was 
the road to the greatest gain. 2 

But, however, to soothe their offended friends, they 
obtain for the Calvinists French, Flemish, and Walloon 

hope for an improvement." That 
improvement never came, for Pil- 
kington, who was bishop of Durham 
i n J 573> thus complains (Zurich 
Letters, ist series, No. no): " We 
endure, I must confess, many things 
against our inclinations, and groan 
under them, which if we wished even 
so much, no entreaty can remove. 
We are under authority, and cannot 
make any innovation without the 
sanction of the queen, or abrogate 
anything without the authority of 
the laws ; and the only alternative 
now allowed us is, whether we will 
bear with these tilings or disturb the 
peace of the Church." Grindal, also 
from London, writing to Bullinger, 
Aug. 27, 1566 (Zurich Letters, ist 
series, No. 73), says : " We who are 
now bishops, on our first return, and 
before we entered on our ministry, 
contended long and earnestly for the 
removal of those things that have 
occasioned the present dispute. But 
as we were unable to prevail either 
with the queen or the Parliament, 
we judged it best, after a consulta 
tion on the subject, not to desert 
our churches for the sake of a few 
ceremonies, and those not unlawful 
in themselves," &c. 

1 George Withers to the Elector 
Palatine (Zurich Letters, 2d series, 
No. 62, p. 163): "But the ministry 
is in fact nothing at all, nor is there 
any discipline. For those persons 
cannot be said to be ministers of 
Christ, but servants of men, who 
can do nothing according to the pre 
script of the Word, but are obliged 
to act in every respect at the 
nod of the queen and the bishops. 
What must we say when most of 
them are Popish priests consecrated 
to perform Mass ? " 

2 George Withers thus writes to 
the Elector Palatine (Zurich Letters, 
2d series, No. 62) : " Then on the 
expulsion of the Popish bishops, 
new ones were to be appointed 
in their room, and most of these 
were of the number of those who 
had been exiles. These at first be 
gan to oppose the ceremonies ; but 
afterwards, when there was no hope 
otherwise of obtaining a bishopric, 
they yielded, and, as one of them 
openly acknowledged, undertook the 
olfice against their conscience." 
Parkhurst, writing to Bullinger, Aug. 
23, 1560 (ibid., ist series, No. 37), 
says, " Many pious persons are quite 
satisfied ; as for myself, a few things 
still remain unsatisfactory, but I 



[BOOK iv. 

the use of certain churches in London, 1 where these 
might pray by themselves, and celebrate their supper in 
the most pure and reformed way. Afterwards there 
was a sharp quarrel between those churches and the 
new synagogue of England. 2 Some of the French 
preachers were afterwards compelled to quit the country, 
and some of that brotherhood were burnt ; 3 for people 
of the foulest morals from divers nations soon joined 
themselves to those churches under the pretence of 
their Calvinism. 

However, they seize with eagerness and without 
scruple upon the bishoprics and other ecclesiastical 
prelacies, even though they knew that the true bishops 
in communion with the whole of Christendom were still 
living, 4 deprived of their dignities for no reason and by 
no lawful authority ; though they possessed a certain 
knowledge that the churches, the sees and the offices 

1 Wilkins, iv. 204. Elizabeth di 
rected the lord treasurer to assign 
the church of the Augustin Friars 
for the use of the strangers, but the 
bishop of London was to appoint the 
preachers or ministers, and Edmund 
Grindal applied to Calvin for direc 
tions. Calvin sent over Nicolas des 
Gallars, who accordingly came, was 
received by Grindal, and settled by 
him as the pastor of the French con 
gregation in London. See Zurich 
Letters, 2d series, No. 21. But in 
1568 (Wilkins, iv. 254), the queen, 
by proclamation, orders these stran 
gers to be examined, doubting lest 
that among such numbers there 
may be some who are guilty of " re 
bellion, murders, robberies* or such 

2 Heylyn (Elizabeth, p. 133) says 
the foreigners were allowed " to 
have a church unto themselves, and 
in that church not only to erect the 
Genevian discipline, but to set up a 
form of prayer which should hold no 
conformity with the English Liturgy. 

. . . What else is the setting up of a 
presbytery in a Church founded and 
established by the rules of Episco 
pacy, than the erecting of a common 
wealth or popular estate in the midst 
of a monarchy ? Which Calvin well 
enough perceived, and thereupon 
gave Grindal thanks for his favour 
in it, of whom they after serve them 
selves upon all occasions." 

3 Heylyn (History of the Presby 
terians, p. 280) records the burning 
of two Dutchmen in Smithfield, July 

2, 1575- 

4 The Catholic bishops were made 
a mockery ; for thus writes Jewell 
to Peter Martyr, Feb. 7, 1562 (Zurich 
Letters, ist series, No. 43): "The 
Marian bishops are still confined in 
the Tower, and are going on in their 
old way. If the laws were but as 
vigorous now as in the time of Henry, 
they would submit themselves with 
out difficulty. They are an obstinate 
and untamed set of men, but are 
nevertheless subdued by terror and 
the sword. v 


had not been founded by other, or for other, than 
Catholic men. But they looked upon all these as some 
one did upon kingdoms, who said that they belonged to 
the first person who could make them his own. The 
queen by her letters -patent granted these dignities, but 
those who accepted them must be ordained by certain 
persons, and in a certain way, according to the laws of 
the realm. 

Henry VIII. , who was the wicked root, made a law, 
when he withdrew the kingdom from the Church and 
the Apostolic See, that no one chosen to be a bishop 
should apply, in order to his consecration, for the Papal 
Bulls or the Apostolic mandate, but should provide him 
self only with the royal licence, and thereupon, ordained 
by three bishops with the consent of the metropolitan, 
and not in any other way, should be recognised as a true 
bishop, in virtue of the act of Parliament 1 made in 
imitation of ancient canons. In the consecrations under 
that act, the king retained the old ceremonial with the 
solemn anointing, according to the tradition of the 
Church ; but Edward VI., going on from bad to worse, 
suppressed it, and put in its place certain prayers which 
were Calvinistic, preserving, however, in force the 
former enactments touching the number of bishops 
present at the laying on of hands on the bishop elect. 
This new legislation was set aside by Mary, and renewed 
by Elizabeth; hence it became necessary for these pre 
lates of the queen to be ordained in this way, namely, 
that with the consent of the metropolitan, two or three 
bishops should be present and lay hands upon them. 

But now, when these superintendents were to be 

*25 Henry VIII. c. 20, s. 5, A.D. and all those who were from that 

1534. Cranmer applied for and ob- time forth consecrated, were conse- 

tained his Bulls ; but no bishop after- crated in heresy and schism till the 

wards during the reign of Henry days of queen Mary, who restored 

either applied for or obtained them, the ancient observances. 


created, the affair became ridiculous ; they could find 
no Catholic bishops to lay hands upon them, and in 
their sect there were neither three nor two bishops, nor 
was there any metropolitan whatsoever, having previ 
ously received episcopal consecration, to give his con 
sent or to lay his hands upon them. They did not betake 
themselves either to their neighbours, the Lutheran or 
Calvinistic Churches, for the purpose of obtaining the 
services of a bishop, for perhaps there were none among 
them. They importuned an Irish archbishop, 1 then a 
prisoner in London, to succour them in the straits they 
were in. They promised to set him at liberty, and to 
reward him for his services, if he would preside at their 
ordination. But the good man could not be persuaded 
to lay hallowed hands upon heretics or be a partaker in 
the sins of others. 

Being thus utterly destitute of all lawful orders, and 
generally spoken of as men who were not bishops, for 
by the laws of England they could not be, they were 
compelled to have recourse to the civil power to obtain 
in the coming Parliament the confirmation of their rank 
from a lay authority, which should also pardon them, if 
anything had been done or left undone, contrary to law, 
in their previous admission to their offices; and this 
was done after they had been for some years acting as 
bishops without any episcopal consecration. 2 Hence 
their name of parliamentary bishops. 

1 The application to the Irish beth, when the statute was made 

archbishop is not denied by Mason declaring the consecrations of the 

(Vindic. Eccles. Anglican., lib. iii. c. bishops good. Renehan, Collections, 

9), who recites the story in the ob- p. n. 

jection, but takes no notice of it in 2 8 Eliz. c. i, s. 4. " That all acts 

his reply. Dr. Dowdall, archbishop and things heretofore had, made, or 

of Armagh, died in 1558, and was done by any person or persons, in or 

succeeded, according to Gams (Series about any consecration, confirmation, 

Episcoporum, p. 207), by Donat. or investing of any person or persons 

O Teig, who died in 1562, and he by elected to the office or dignity of any 

Richard Creagh, who was a prisoner archbishop or bishop within this 

in London before the eighth of Eliza- realm, or within any other the 



Whatever tliose false bishops may be, or by what 
means they were so made, they came out of their dens 
and lairs lions and wolves, strong to seize their prey, to 
domineer over clergy and laity, and to plunder them by 
ways that were new and never heard of before. First 
of all the queen held her own visitation throughout the 
whole realm, then the metropolitans made another each 
in his province, and the bishop a third in his diocese : 
during these visitations the Catholics were most rigor 
ously sought out and punished, and marvellous reforms 
were made. 

Among the articles of inquiry were these : * Is Mass 
anywhere still said ? Is the sacrament reserved ? Are 
there any churches in which the divine service newly 
ordered is not said ? Are there any altars unbroken 
and undefaced ? Is the choir made level with the floors 
of the nave of the church ? Do the windows or the walls 
preserve any traces of images ? How many chalices, 
pyxes, and crucifixes are left ? Of what material ? The 

queen s dominions or countries, by 
virtue of the queen s majesty s letters- 
patent or commission, sithence the 
beginning of her majesty s reign, be, 
and shall be, by authority of this 
present Parliament, declared, j udged, 
and deemed, at and from every of 
the several times of the doing there 
of, good and perfect to all respects 
and purposes ; any matter or thing 
that can, or may, be objected to the 
contrary thereof in any wise not 

1 The Queen s Injunctions, A.D. 
1559 (Wilkins, iv. 182), require "the 
whole Bible of the largest volume in 
English, and within twelve months 
next after the said visitation the 
Paraphrases of Erasmus also in Eng 
lish ; " and the destruction of " all 
shrines, coverings of shrines, all 
tables, candlesticks, trindals, and 
rolls of wax, pictures, paintings, 
. so that there remain no me 

mory of the same in walls, glass 
windows, or elsewhere within their 
churches and houses." And that 
the churchwardens of every parish 
" shall deliver unto our visitors the 
inventories of vestments, copes, and 
other ornaments, plate, books," &c. 
In the articles of the queen s visita 
tion, A.D. 1559 (Wilkins, iv. 189), it 
is asked whether " they minister the 
holy communion any otherwise than 
only after such form and manner 
as it is set forth by the common 
authority of the queen s majesty and 
the Parliament." And also, Whether 
you know any man in your parish, 
or in unlawful conventicles, say or 
hear Mass, or any other service pro 
hibited by the law." Grindal, also, in 
York, A.D. 1571 (Wilkins, iv. 269), 
directs " all altars to be pulled down 
to the ground, and the altar stones 
defaced and bestowed to some com 
mon use ; and roodlofts altered." 


people were compelled to provide Bibles in English, 
most falsely translated by heretics, and defiled with im 
pious notes, the "Institutions" of Calvin, and books of the 
same kind, and to place copies in every church, where 
any one might read them ; lastly, they made inquiries 
concerning the life of the parish priests, whom they 
generally advised to marry betimes. 

The new clergy of England, partly apostates l and 
partly laymen, as it is a very spiritual clergy, 2 turned 
its thoughts at once to marriage, and strove hard to 
obtain a legal sanction for the marriages of bishops, 
canons, and others of the ministry, and for the legiti 
macy of their children ; but it could not obtain it, for 
their marriages were regarded as a dishonour to the 
ministry and a danger to the state. Edward VI., it is 
true, removed by an act of Parliament all hindrances 
canonical and civil to the marriage of clerks and even of 
religious, but that law was repealed under queen Mary. 
And now a cry is raised for the repeal of the act of 
Mary, but nobody listens. Nevertheless, in every part 
of the kingdom, the ministers, not certain, as they say, 
of the gift of chastity, without law, but with licence, 
or, as they speak, with the Scriptures on their side, but 
so explained as to favour sin, marry once, twice, yea, 
even three times, contrary to the canons, and the cus 
tom not of the Latins only, but of the Greeks also. 
The result is that, having large families to support and 
provide for, they are very hard upon the people, and 
miserably dilapidate their benefices. 

1 Perceval Wilrarn (Zurich Letters, ordination of illiterate men to be 
2d series, p. 358) says, "The English readers, which likewise many were 
clergy consist partly of the Popish offended at. These readers had been 
priests, who still retain their former tradesmen, or other honest well-dis- 
office, and partly of ministers lately posed men, and they were admitted 
ordered by some bishop there." into inferior orders, to serve the 

2 Strype, Annals, i. i. 265. " An- Church in the present necessity by 
other inconvenience the want of reading the common prayer and the 
clergymen now brought was the homilies and orders unto the people/ 7 



They were either careless or unlucky from the very 
first in the choice of wives, for almost all of them 
married women of tainted reputation ; the weaker 
brethren were therefore scandalised, and the Catholics 
laughed. Then the queen interposed her authority, 
and every woman about to be married to a clerk, even 
if he were a bishop, was to be approved of by certain 
persons. 1 And yet after all, this was not a sufficient 
safeguard for their honour and their needs ; for many of 
them said they could not live without wives any more 
than they could live Avithout food, for the yoke of 
celibacy was an unbearable burden. Even the Protest 
ants, to say nothing of Catholics, would not give them 
their daughters in marriage ; for they regarded it as 
something disgraceful to be, or to be said to be, the 
wife of a priest. Then, according to the law of the 
land, those marriages are not yet lawful, the issue are 
bastards, 2 and the wife and children obtain neither 

1 Queen Elizabeth s Injunctions 
(Wilkins, iv. 185, 186). "Because 
there hath grown offence and some 
slander to the Church by lack of dis 
creet and sober behaviour in many 
ministers of the Church, both in 
choosing of their wives and indis 
creet living with them, . . . no man 
ner of priest or deacon shall hereafter 
take to his wife any manner of 
woman without the advice and allow 
ance first had upon good examina 
tion by the bishop of the same dio 
cese, and two justices of the peace 
of the same shire. . . . 

" And for the manner of marriages 
of any bishops, the same shall be 
allowed and approved by the metro 
politan of the province, and also by 
such commissioners as the queen s 
majesty thereunto shall appoint. 

" And if any master or dean, or 
any head of any college, shall purpose 
to marry, the same shall not be 
allowed but by such to whom the 
visitation of the same doth properly 

belong, who shall in any wise pro 
vide that the same tend not to the 
hindrance of their house." 

In a proclamation, dated Aug. 9, 
1561 (Wilkins, iv. 227), the queen 
" willeth and commandeth that no 
manner of person, being either the 
head or member of any college or 
cathedral church within this realm, 
shall ... be permitted to have 
within the precinct of any such 
college his wife or other woman to 
abide and dwell in the same, or to 
frequent and haunt any lodging 
within the said college." 

2 Dr. Sandys, writing to Parker, 
April 30, 1559 (Burnet, v. 506, ed. 
Pocock), says, " Lever was married 
now of late ": the queen s majesty will 
wink at it, but not stablish it by law, 
which is nothing else but to bastard 
our children." Laurence Humphrey 
and Sampson, in a letter to Bullin- 
ger, July 1566 (Zurich Letters, ist 
series, p. 164), says, " The marriage 
of the clergy is not allowed and 


rank nor honour in the state from the rank of the 
father, which is inconsistent with the nature of a real 
marriage. Neither archbishop nor bishop, nor any 
other prelate, if married, can give any rank or precedence 
to his wife, who is no better than an unmarried woman. 
Accordingly the queen herself never receives these 
women in court, not even those who are said to be the 
wives of archbishops. The wives of the nobility avoid 
them also, and they confine themselves to the houses of 
those who have taken them into them. These marriages 


being attended by these inconveniences, hardly any 
honest woman could be found who would become the 
wife of even the highest dignitaries, who were therefore 
forced to marry whom they could get. 1 

The civil magistrate checked these men in other 
ways. The fellows of colleges in the universities are 
very many, well fed, with abundance of leisure, and 
grown up ; well, these men also wished to have wives, 
but it was found to be inconvenient, and the privilege 
was granted to the heads of colleges only, but upon 
this condition, that the wives were to live outside the 
college and very rarely enter its gates. 2 

sanctioned by the public laws of the injury, showed them openly the said 

kingdom, but their children are by battledore. Many like stories arid 

some persons regarded as illegiti- frays were daily heard of at that 

mate." time, and many of those women 

1 Harpsfield, Treatise of Marriage, would say to the said priests, being 

bk. iii. p. 100. "It would pity a man reproved of them for their vicious 

at the heart to hear of the naughty living, Why, knave, thinkest thou 

and dissolute life that these yokel that, if I had been an honest woman, 

priests led with others also beside I would ever have married with 

their pretended wives, wherein the thee ? " 

women were nothing behind for their 2 Perceval Wiburn thus sums the 
parts, and to hear of the strife, con- matter (Zurich Letters, 2d series, 
tentions, and debates that were p. 359) : " The lords bishops are for- 
among them. Among other there bidden to have their wives with them 
was one in Kent, which all to beat in their palaces ; as also are the 
her yokemate with a wash-betle or deans, canons, presbyters, and other 
battledore, upon whom he com- ministers of the Church within col- 
plained grievously to the judges at the leges or the precincts of cathedral 
sizes, and the more to aggerate his churches." 

(281 ) 





Now as many of these new-fashioned clerks, to avoid 
superstition, wished to appear in public, and to minister 
in the church in the ordinary dress of a layman, 1 the 
queen issued her orders on the apparel and dress of 
ecclesiastics. She strictly enjoined the use of a cope in 
the administration of their Eucharist, 2 and of a surplice 
in the reading of the other prayers, 3 and forbade them 
to appear abroad without a gown and cap. 4 Even the 
bishops must wear a rochet. 5 

Hereupon arose a great dispute among these brethren; 6 

1 Laurence Humphrey, the queen s 
professor of theology, and president 
of Magdalene College, Oxford, and 
the biographer of Jewell, asks Bui- 
linger, Feb. 9, 1 566 (Zurich Letters, 
ist series, No. 68), "whether laws 
respecting habits may properly be 
prescribed to churchmen, so as to 
distinguish them from the laity in 
shape, colour, &c." 

2 Wilkins, Concil., iv. 186. The 
Injunctions of 1559 require "all 
archbishops and bishops, and all 
other," &c., "shall use and wear 
such seemly habits, garments, and 
such square caps as were most com 
monly and orderly received in the 
latter year of the reign of king 
Edward VI." But in the Advertise 

ments of 1564 (ibid., iv. 248), "in 
the ministration of the holy com 
munion in cathedral and collegiate 
churches, the principal minister shall 
use a cope." 

3 Wilkins, iv. 248. " Every mini 
ster saying any public prayers . . . 
shall wear a comely surplice with 

4 Ibid., iv. 249. "All inferior 
ecclesiastical persons shall wear long 
gowns of the fashion aforesaid, and 
caps as before is presented." 

5 Ibid., iv. 249. "All archbishops 
and bishops do use and continue 
their accustomed apparel." 

6 Jewell writes to Bullinger from 
Salisbury, Feb. 24, 1567 (Zurich 
Letters, ist series, No. 77), "It is 



[BOOK iv. 

they would not submit to the queen, and sent messengers 
and letters to their brethren in France, Germany, Swit 
zerland, and the Savoy, especially to Theodore Beza 1 and 
Peter Martyr, 2 requesting their opinion and advice. 
They wished to know whether, now that they were free 
in, Christ, they could lawfully undergo this yoke of 
slavery. 3 Those men might answer, advise, or determine 
as they pleased ; the queen deprives every recusant of 
his rank and benefice, 4 for there is no appeal from the 

quite certain the queen will not be 
turned from her opinion, and some 
of our brethren are contending about 
this matter, as if the whole of our 
religion were contained in this single 
point ; so that they choose rather to 
lay down their functions, and leave 
their churches empty, than to de 
part one tittle from their own 
views of the subject." Horn also 
(ibid., No. 64) says, " It was en 
joined us, who had not then any 
authority to make laws or to repeal 
them, either to wear the caps and 
surplices or to give place to others. 
We complied with this injunction, 
lest our enemies should take pos 
session of the places deserted by our 
selves. But as this matter has occa 
sioned a great strife amongst us, so 
that our little flock has divided 
itself into two parties, ... I beg 
of you," &c. 

1 Beza writes to Bullinger (Zurich 
Letters, 2d series, No. 53), " Our dis 
tressed brethren seek the consolation, 
advice, and prayers of those churches 
by whose love they were formerly 
refreshed, and hope also to be re 
freshed at the present time. Some 
of them, I admit, are rather hard to 
please, but in so much affliction it 
is difficult to keep within bounds. 
. . . From the statement, that you 
will receive in detail from this our 
brother, of which also he has left a 
copy here with me, you will learn 
that the Papacy was never abolished 
in that country, but rather trans- 
i erred to the sovereign." 

2 Peter Martyr generally recom 
mended his friends to obey the 
queen, and to keep their places ; but 
he had not been so obedient himself, 
for thus he writes to Sampson (Zu 
rich Letters, 2d series, No. 14), "As 
to myself, when I was at Oxford, 
I would never wear the surplice in 
the choir, although I was a canon ; 
and I had my own reasons for doing 
so." He advised Sampson (ibid., 
No. n) to "retain the function of 
preaching, . . . arid to declaim against 
rites which are full of offence arid 
occasions of falling." 

3 Humphrey, ut supra, asks Bui- 
linger " whether those persons who 
have till now enjoyed their liberty 
can with a safe conscience, by the 
authority of a royal edict, involve in 
this bondage both themselves and 
the Church." 

4 Miles Coverdale, Humphrey, and 
Sampson, in their letter to Beza and 
others (Zurich Letters, 2d series, No. 
50), says : " Out of doors must be 
worn the square cap, bands, a long 
gown, and tippet, while the white 
surplice and cope are to be retained 
in divine service. And those who 
refuse to comply with these require 
ments are deprived of their estates, 
dignities, and every ecclesiastical 
office namely, brethren by brethren 
and bishops, whose houses are at this 
time the prisons of some preachers ; 
who are now raging against their 
own bowels ; who are now imposing 
these burdens not only on their own 
persons, but also on the shoulders of 


supreme head of the Anglican to foreign synagogues, 
however much they might be reformed. The queen 
retained many of the ancient customs and ceremonies at 
the persuasion of her ministers, and against the will of 
the new clergy, partly for the honour and illustration of 
this new Church, and partly for the sake of persuading 
her own subjects and foreigners into the belief that she 
was not far, or had not gone far, from the Catholic faith. 
In this matter she behaved with great cunning in her 
relations with her lovers, suitors, and allies, whether at 
home or abroad, who were for the most part Catholics. 
She would raise hopes in them that she might perhaps 
return to the faith of her predecessors. But her chief 
reasons, though not all, were these : she knew that the 
ministers of the new sect, under the pretence of avoiding 
superstition, would by degrees destroy, in Church and 
state, all order, good manners, policy, and civilisation 
itself yea, and even their own religion by their savage 
rudeness, if the civil power did not put some check upon 
them. Certainly it contributed in a very great degree 
to the establishing and building up of this heresy that 
it was not left to the discretion of the clergy; for it 
would have long ago vanished in smoke, carried away 
by this evangelical liberty, if human policy had not sus 
tained and kept it in order. 1 

others ; and this too at a time when, (Zurich Letters, ist series, No. 9), 
in the judgment of all learned men, says, " The scenic apparatus of divine 
they ought to have been removed worship is now under agitation ; 
and abolished altogether." John and these very things which you and 
Abel, in a letter to Bullinger (ibid., I have so often laughed at are now 
No. 49), says, " Five preachers have seriously and solemnly entertained 
lately been deprived and sent as by certain persons, for we are not 
prisoners, two of them to Master consulted, as if the Christian re- 
Horn, bishop of Winchester ; two to ligion could not exist without some- 
Dr. Cox bishop of Ely ; and one to thing tawdry." The language of 
Master Parkhurst, bishop of Nor- Cox, bishop of Ely, is still more 
wich, ... so long as the queen and frightful ; writing to Peter Martyr 
her council shall think fit." (Zurich Letters, ist series, No. 28), 
1 Jewell, writing to Peter Martyr he says, " We are only constrained, 


For a long time she retained the organs, the ecclesi 
astical chants, 1 the crucifix, copes, candles, and principally 
for this reason, that the clergy, in these garments, might 
come forth in procession to receive her whenever, either 
for business or pleasure, she made her public entry into 
any city, as was her custom often to do. For the same 
reason, too, the bells were spared, that they might be 
rung whenever, in her progress, she passed by a church ; 
but principally on her birthday and on the day of her 
coronation, which days are kept with more solemnity 
throughout the kingdom than the festivals of Christ and 
of the saints. Indeed the Protestants were compelled 
by law to keep in some way or other almost all the 
ancient holy days of the Church ; but they have shown 
their spite more especially against the feast of Corpus 
Christi, the Assumption, Nativity, and Conception of our 
Lady, which they have utterly suppressed. 2 And to 
show the greater contempt for our Blessed Lady, they 
keep the birthday of queen Elizabeth in the most solemn 
way on the yth day of September, which is the eve of 
the feast of the Mother of God, whose nativity they 
mark in their calendar in small and black letters, while 
that of Elizabeth is marked in letters both large and 
red. And, what is hardly credible, in the church of St. 
Paul, the chief church of London whether elsewhere or 

to our great distress of mind, to assert that the chanting in churches, 
tolerate in our churches the image together with the organ, is to be re- 
of the cross and Him who was tained, but we disapprove of it, as 
crucified : the Lord must be en- we ought to do." 
treated that this stumbling-block 2 Wilkins, iv. 239. Sandys pro- 
may at length be removed." posed in convocation, A.D. 1563, 
1 Edwin Sandys, bishop of Wor- " that all saints, feasts, and holy 
cester, asked convocation in A.D. days bearing the name of a creature, 
1563 (Wilkins, iv. 239) to move the may, as tending to superstition, or 
queen to the effect * that all curious rather gentility, be clearly abrogated; 
singing and playing of the organs or at least a commemoration only re- 
may be removed." Four years later, served of the said saints by sermons, 
Grindal and Horn, also bishops, homilies, or common prayers, for 
writing to Bullinger (Zurich Letters, the better instructing of the people 
ist series, No. 75;, say, "We ao not in history." 


not is more than I can tell the praises of Elizabeth are 
said to be sung at the end of the public prayers, as the 
Antiphon of our Lady was sung in former days. 

The Protestants are forced also somehow or other, 
even now, to keep the fast formerly observed, though 
they do it very much against their will, for they com 
plain loudly that the ordering of matters of this sort 
is contrary to Scripture and the liberty of the gospel. 
But the queen, for the relief of their consciences 
herein, makes a proclamation at the beginning of Lent 
every year, 1 that the fast is ordered to be kept not for the 
sake of religion, penance, or devotion, but simply for the 
good of the state ; in order by the greater consumption 
of fish to furnish the fishermen, a large class of men in 
the island, with a livelihood, and to have during the rest 
of the year a more abundant supply of fleshmeat, and in 
particular for the necessary provisioning of the fleet. 2 

Not deeming the abstinence of Friday and Saturday 
to be a sufficient support of the navy, the queen insti 
tuted a fast to be kept every Wednesday, 3 now com 
monly known as Cecil s fast, because it is regarded as 

1 Co] Her, Eccles. Hist., bk. iv. p. of the navy of the realm, whereby 
476. " The queen concurred with the not only commodities of other coun- 
archbishop [Parker], for this year tries may be transported, but also 
there was a strict proclamation for the may be a necessary defence to resist 
keeping of Lent, which was likewise the invasion of the adversary." 

the constant custom of this reign." 3 5 Eliz. c. 5, s. 14. " From the 

2 The SecondPart of the Homily of feast of St. Michael the Archangel, in 
Fasting. " But first an answer shall the year of our Lord God 1564, every 
be made to a question that some may Wednesday in every week, through- 
make, demanding what judgment we out the year, which heretofore hath 
ought to have of such abstinences as not by the laws or customs of this 
are appointed by public order and law r s realm been used and observed as a 
made by princes and by the autho- fish-day, and which shall not happen 
rity of the magistrates upon policy, to fall in Christmas week or Easter 
not respecting any religion at all week, shall be hereafter observed and 
in the same. As when any realm kept, as the Saturdays in every week 
in consideration of the maintaining be, or ought to be ; and that no 
of fisher-towns bordering upon the manner of person shall eat any flesh 
seas, and for the increase of fisher- on the same day, otherwise than 
men, of whom do spring mariners to ought to be upon the common Satur- 
go upon the sea, to the furnishing day." 



[BOOK iv. 

his invention. Though the people, who despise these 
public fasts, are liable to heavy fines/ very few observe 
them, and certainly not the bishops and the rest of the 
clergy, who are very much ashamed to find themselves 
under the law of fasting. But the queen herself easily 
grants a dispensation in writing, upon cause assigned, to 
the lords and others, and the archbishop of Canterbury 
also on the payment of fees. 2 

In short, the queen lays down for her clergy a rule of 
life, outside of which they dare not move, not only in 
those things which Protestants call indifferent, but in all 
matters of faith, discipline, and doctrine, in virtue of that 
supreme spiritual power with which she is invested : 3 
she suspends her bishops when she pleases, 4 she grants 
a licence to preach, 5 either to those who are ordained 

1 5Eliz. c.~5, s. 15. The penalty for 
eating flesli on. the fish-days is the 
forfeiture of three pounds or three 
months imprisonment without bail 
or mainprise. 

2 Zurich Letters, 2d series, p. 360. 
The State of the Church of England, 
by Perceval Wiburn. " He [the 
archbishop] has also the Court of 
Faculties, where, on the payment 
beforehand of a pretty large sum 
of money, licences are obtained for 
non-residence, plurality of benefices, 
dispensations for forbidden meats on 
the third, fifth, and sixth holiday [the 
translator probably meant Wednes 
day, Friday, and Saturday], the vigils 
of the saints, Lent, and the ember 
days of the four seasons." These 
dispensations issued out of the Court 
of Faculties, and Grindal, when he 
had possession of Canterbury, gives 
an account of its processes. The 
archbishop s commissary with a re 
gistrar constituted the court, but the 
fees paid in this way, one-half to the 
queen, the other half divided between 
the lord chancellor and his registrar, 
the archbishop, the commissary, and 
the registrar. Thus, if the fee were 
g, the queen had ,4, ios., the arch- 


bishop 2, the lord chancellor ^r, 
his registrar ios., the commissary of 
the court ios., and the registrar ios." 
Grindal s Remains, ed. Parker So 
ciety, p. 446. 

3 Pilkington, to whom she gave the 
see of Durham, writing to Gualter, 
July 20, 1573 (Zurich Let., ist series, 
No. no), complains as follows : "We 
endure, I must confess, many things 
against our inclinations, and groan 
under them, which, if we wished ever 
so much, no entreaty can remove. We 
are under authority, and cannot make 
any innovation without the sanction 
of the queen, or abrogate anything 
without the authority of the laws ; 
and the only alternative now allowed 
us is, whether we will bear with these 
things or disturb the peace of the 

4 She suspended Grindal arch 
bishop of Canterbury. See Wilkins, 
Concilia, iv. 289. 

6 Injunctions of the Queen, s. 8 ; 
Wilkins, iv. 183. "They shall ad 
mit no man to preach within any 
their cures but such as shall appear 
unto them to be sufficiently licensed 
thereunto by the queen s majesty, or 
the archbishop of Canterbury or York 



according to lier rite or to simple laymen, and in the 
same way at her pleasure reduces whom she will to 
silence. To show her authority in these things, she 
occasionally, from her closet, addresses her preacher, and 
interrupts him in the presence of a large congregation, 
in some such way as this : " Mr. Doctor, you are wan 
dering from the text, and talking nonsense, return to 
your subject." 

This, then, is the way in which religion is administered 
in England at this time. I will now say nothing for it 
must be reserved for another work and another occasion 
of civil affairs and the like, nor of the queen s suitors 
foreign and domestic, whom she encouraged, and who 
in their turn were masters in court and council ; nothing 
of the many noble personages English, Scotch, Aus 
trian, Swede, and French 2 whom she from the very 
beginning of her reign to this day deluded, nor how 
both Houses of Parliament, 3 who often begged her, for 

in either of their provinces, or by 
the bishop of the diocese, or by the 
queen s majesty s visitors." 

1 Heylyn, Hist. Reform., p. 124. 
" Particularly when one of her chap 
lains, Mr. Alexander Nowel, dean of 
St. Paul s, had spoke less reverently 
in a sermon preached before her of 
the sign of the cross, she called aloud 
to him from her closet window, com 
manding him to retire from that un 
godly digression, and return unto 
his text." 

2 Jewell, writing to Peter Martyr 
from London (Zurich Let, ist series, 
No. 9), says, " Nothing is yet talked 
of about the queen s marriage, yet 
there are now courting her the king of 
Sweden, the Saxon, and Charles the 
son of Ferdinand, to say nothing of the 
Englishman Pickering." Ibid., No. 
14 : "The public opinion, however, 
inclines towards Sir William Picker 
ing." Camden (Annales, p. 67) adds 
James earl of Arran, a Scotchman. 

3 Jewell to Bullinger, Feb. 24, 
1567 (Zurich Let., ist ser., No. 77) : 
We have assembled within these 
few months the Parliament of the 
whole kingdom. . . . The question re 
specting the succession was likewise 
brought forward. . . . This question 
occupied the minds of all parties for 
a month or two ; for the queen was 
unwilling that any discussion should 
take place upon the subject, while 
every one else was exceedingly 
anxious about it : and the contest 
was carried on with great earnestness 
and ability on both sides. What 
next ] After all, nothing could be 
done ; for the queen, who is a wise 
and cautious woman, suspects that 
when her successor is once deter 
mined upon, there may hence arise 
some danger to herself. For you 
know the saying, that there are more 
worshippers of the rising than of the 
setting sun." See also Sir Simonds 
d Ewes, Journals, p. 107. 


the sake of the succession and the safety of the realm, 
to choose a husband either among her own subjects or 
among strangers, were either satisfied or mocked by 
her assertion that she was resolved to live and die a 
virgin ; nor will I speak of the great scandal which she 
gave not only to Catholics, but to the people of her own 
sect, by this pretence of a single life, which was the 
ruin of the state, and by her ecclesiastical supremacy, 
which was the ruin of the Church. 

But there is one thing, and it belongs in a special 
manner to the subject of my book, which ought not to 
be passed over in silence. The queen and her politicians 
understood at once, as soon as their sect arid religion 
had been set up, that many of her subjects would be 
very much disturbed by the changes wrought in Church 
and state ; that she would find a stern judge in the 
Pope, and that the emperor and the most powerful 
Christian kings would withdraw from her. Then, being 
thus severed in faith and communion from the whole 
world, she would not be long safe against her own 
subjects or her neighbours. There was, therefore, no 
security for her but in inflicting a like calamity as soon 
as possible upon the neighbouring countries, 1 France 
and Scotland and Flanders, that all the Catholic sove 
reigns being fully occupied with their own affairs, might 
have no time to attend to those of others. 2 

1 See the "Desire for Alteration 2 Hilles, writing to Bullinger from 

of Religion" (Burnet, v. 497). Among London, July 31, 1562 (Zurich Let., 

other suggestions is this : First, for 2<1 series, No. 38), says, " The queen 

France, " to practise a peace, or if it appears to be considering the evils 

be offered, not to refuse it : if contro- that may possibly be hanging over 

versy of religion be there amongst us, and is apprehensive lest any mis- 

them, to kindle it. ... fortune should arise to the realm by 

" Scotland will follow France for reason of negligence and inactivity ; 

peace, but there may be practice that is, lest any foreign prince, in the 

to help forward their division, and event of the disorders which still 

specially to augment the hope of exist in France being settled, should 

them who inclined them to good be stirred up by the Roman Pontiff, 

religion," i.e., to Protestantism. or any other foreign Papists who 



Accordingly all the treaties between England and 
the great monarchs of Christendom were at once either 
openly violated or observed only in appearance ; those 
of recent date, as well as the older treaties, were dealt 
with in the same way. Then, to the unutterable dis 
honour of England, and to their everlasting shame, the 
queen and her councillors made a league with those who 
were in rebellion against all those sovereigns, with the 
men who were traitors to their country and plagues of 
the world. 1 In Scotland they are the confederates of 
James the bastard, 2 Morton, 3 and others against queen 
Mary ; in France they are leagued together with the 
admiral, and men of the same kind, 4 most detestable 
tyrants, against the most Christian kings, three brothers 
in succession ; in Flanders they ally themselves against 
the most mighty and just sovereign, Philip, with the 
scourge of God the reprobate prince of Orange. 5 In a 
word, they send troops into their countries, lay waste 
their borders, take their cities, plunder their treasuries ; 
they send out pirates, 6 who commit grievous depreda- 

adhere to him, to find some occasion 
of quarrel against her." 

1 Jewell, writing to Bullinger, 
Aug. 14, 1562 (Zurich Letters, ist 
series, No. 50), says : " Our queen 
. . . gradually withdrew her alliance 
with the Guises, and not obscurely 
intimated her determination to assist 
the prince of Conde. The duke of 
Guise was very angry at this, . . . 
and declared by a public proclama 
tion that the queen of England was 
planning intrigues against the king 
dom of France, and that she alone 
had occasioned those disorders." 

2 James Stewart, earl of Murray, 
and prior of St. Andrews, was a 
natural child of James V. 

3 James Douglas, earl of Morton. 
This nobleman, on the murder at 
Dumbarton of the last archbishop of 
St. Andrews, made an apostate Car 

melite friar bishop, and thereby took 
the revenues of the see into his own 

4 The admiral Gaspar de Coligni. 
The queen had bound herself (Cam- 
den, Annales, p. 93) to pay the prince 
of Conde, Rohan, the admiral, and 
others "an hundred thousand angels," 
to send over into France six thousand 
men, whereof three thousand should 
be employed for the defence of 
Dieppe and Kouen." 

6 William of Nassau-Dillembourg 
obtained possession of the principality 
of Orange under the will of a cousin, 
who had it in right of his wife, for 
sook the Catholic faith, and founded 
the republic of Holland, in rebellion 
against the king of Spain, who put a 
price upon his head. 

6 Francis Drake, John Hawkins, 
and Oxenham. 


tions, and in every country urge the people into re 
bellion. By means of their barbarous religion spreading 
like a pestilence, they have brought their neighbours 
the Scots to ruin, and their queen into that most 
miserable condition, utterly undeserved, in which we see 
her at this moment. In France they have been poison 
to unnumbered souls, and brought kings, still in their 
youth, into extreme peril. Lastly, they have corrupted 
almost the whole of Belgium ; they have made them 
selves the accomplices, the leaders, and the protectors 
of the seditious heretics in every nation, to the end that 
the disorder raging throughout Christendom might be 
made still greater. All this they did in order that, 
through the misfortunes of other sovereigns and other 
countries, they might themselves live in peace at home, 
and by the scattering far and wide of the poison of 
their heretical corruption, secure to themselves a longer 
continuance in their sect. 1 

While the whole island was in this way going to 
destruction, France in distress, and all the northern 
nations in danger, Pius IV. 2 offered the ordinary remedy 
of the Church for so great an evil. Hitherto the con 
vocation of a general council had met with many 
hindrances, but now, after laborious efforts, and with 
the assent of almost all the princes of Christendom, he 
summoned it to meet in Trent. He sent a Nuncio, 3 

1 Heylyn, Hist. Eeform., p. 163. French, and the French Protestants 

" For well she knew that if the from being ruined and oppressed by 

Hugonots were not encouraged under- the house of Guise, so on the same 

hand, and the Guisian faction kept she afterwards undertook the patron- 

in breath by their frequent stirrings, age of the Belgic Netherlands against 

they would be either hammering the tyranny and ambition of the 

some design against her in her own duke of Alva, who otherwise might 

dominions, or animate the queen of have brought the Avar to her own 

Scots to stand to her title and pre- door, and hazarded the peace and 

tensions for the crown of England, safety of her whole estate." 

Upon which general ground of self- 2 John Angelo di Medici, elected 

preservation, as she first aided those Dec. 26, 1559, died Dec. 9, 1565. 

of Scotland for the expelling of the 3 Dod,ed.Tierney,ii. 147. "Where- 



who was to travel through Lower Germany to England, 
to represent to Elizabeth her errors, and to persuade her 
not to ruin herself and her illustrious realm out of hatred 
to the Pope. He was also to say that, if on account of 
her doubtful birth she was afraid that her title to the 
throne might, on the part of the Church or the Pope, 
be questioned, the matter could be easily settled, for 
the Apostolic See is indulgent. The queen would 
neither listen to the Nuncio nor allow him even to land 
in England. 

Soon afterwards the Pontiff, to leave no means un 
tried, sent another Legate 1 to persuade the queen to 
allow some at least of her own bishops to attend the 
council, and to enter into conference with the Catholics, 
promising them liberty of speech and the safety of their 
persons. That Legate, too, was disdainfully refused. 
The mock prelates also, aware of their own weakness 
and ignorance, were very urgent with the queen that 
none of them should be sent to the council. 2 

fore about May 1560 lie sent his 
Nuncio as far as Flanders with 
orders to pass over into England, 
and exhort the queen to return back 
into the bosom of the Catholic 
Church. . . . This design being 
imparted to the queen and council, 
they entered into a consultation about 
it. ... The negative being resolved 
upon, the Nuncio proceeded no fur 
ther than Calais." The Nuncio was 
Vincent Parpaglia, abbot of St. 
Saviour s, and the refusal to receive 
him disposes of the story that he 
was the bearer of a message from the 
Pope to the effect that the Pope was 
willing to reverse the sentence against 
the marriage of Henry and Anne 
Boleyn, thereby bastardising queen 
Mary, and to sanction the changes 
which Elizabeth had made in the 
divine offices, on the condition of 
acknowledging the jurisdiction of 

the Pope. See Camden, Annales, 

P- 73- 

1 The abbot Martinengo, sent over 
in 1561. Of him, Jewell, writing to 
Peter Martyr, Feb. 7, 1562 (Zurich 
Letters, ist series, No. 43), says, 
" The Pope s Nuncio is still loitering 
in Flanders, for he cannot yet ob 
tain a safe-conduct to come over to 

2 Jewell, writing to Peter Martyr, 
Feb. 7, 1562 (Zurich Letters, ist 
series, No. 43), says: "Our queen 
has fully made up her mind not to 
send any representative to the coun 
cil, as to the existence or locality of 
which we are totally ignorant : cer 
tainly, if it is held anywhere, or has 
any being at all, it must be very 
secret and obscure. We are now 
thinking about publishing the rea 
sons which have induced us to de 
cline attendance." 



LETTERS, too, at this time were brought to Elizabeth 
from the Catholic sovereigns, and especially from the 
emperor Ferdinand, who in most affectionate terms 
entreated her not to forsake the fellowship, in matters 
of faith and religion, of all Christian princes, and even of 
her own forefathers ; not to set her own opinion, and the 
opinion of certain men who were of yesterday, neither 
many nor learned, above the judgment of the Church. 
If, however, she had made up her mind to continue in 
the sect she had adopted, in spite of the decision of the 
sovereign Pontiff and a general council, or the example 
of her Christian fellow-sovereigns, that in that case she 
would at least, out of her natural kindliness and good 
ness, proceed no further against those learned and pious 
men, the Catholic bishops, who were in her prisons, but 
rather set them free, seeing that they had done nothing 
against her majesty or against the state ; the only 
offence laid to their charge being their perseverance in 
the communion, and their profession, of the ancient 
faith, which is the faith of all nations, and which, said 
the emperor, " is also mine." Lastly, he earnestly begs 
of her to let them and the other Catholics have the use 
of some of the churches in the kingdom, wherein they 
may meet together for the worship of God according to 



the rites of the Catholic religion. But even he could 
gain nothing, and matters in England went daily from 
bad to worse. 1 

It was discussed in the council whether Elizabeth, on 
account of her unendurable obstinacy, should not be 
publicly denounced as a heretic, seeing that she was 
according to law an excommunicated person. Nothing, 
however, was done, for the emperor, whose son she had 
led to hope and expect to be her husband, obtained 
from the fathers a respite ; for he told them that when 
she was married to a Catholic husband, she must come 
to a better mind. But she deceived this suitor as she 
had deceived others, and was day by day more obstin 
ate, and to the Catholics more cruel. 

At this time Mary queen of Scots resolved upon 
flight. She had been harassed by the treachery of 
English heretics, and the unutterable cruelty of her own 
subjects : she had been shut in a prison and compelled 
to resign. She lost her husband by a most iniquitous 
murder, and then was herself accused of the crime. 2 

1 Camden, Annales/p. 52. " Hoe 
tempore quum imperator et Catholic! 
principes crebris litteris intercede- 
rent ut clementer cum episcopis 
abdicatis ageretur, et templa in ur- 
bibus seorsim Pontificiis permitte- 
rentur, respondit [Elizabetha] . . . 
Templa autem in quibus sua divina 
officia seorsim celebrent, salva re- 
publica et illseso honore atque con- 
scientia concedere non posse. . . . 
Permittere vero templa cum ritibua 
cliversis, prsBterquam quod legibus 
parliamentaria auctoritate sancitis 
aperte repugnet, nihil aliud esset 
quam religionem ex religione serere, 
mentes bonorum varie distrahere, 
factiosorum studia alere, religionem 
atque rempublicam conturbare, et 
divina humanaque commiscere." . . . 
The queen made her own conscience, 
it seems, the rule of the conscience 
of others; but at the same time, while 

refusing this questionable boon to 
the Catholics) she granted it to all 
the foreign heretics, and gave the 
crypt of Canterbury Cathedral to the 
French Protestimts, who are in pos 
session of it at this day. 

2 Grindal to Bullinger, Aug. 29, 
1567 (Zurich Letters, ist series, No. 
81): " The queen by a solemn public 
instrument resigned her royal dig 
nity to the prince her son. . . . The 
queen is still kept in the closest 
confinement, and there are those 
who think it will be perpetual. It 
is reported that there were found in 
Bothwell s writing-desk some letters 
written in the queen s own hand, 
in which she exhorted Bothwell to 
accelerate the death of the king her 
husband. How true this may be, I 
know not." Camden, Annales, 141: 
" Tandem mortis terrore injecto, 
earn inauditani compulerunt tribus 



[BOOK iv. 

She might easily have made her way into the territories 
of some Christian king, and there were among the 
Scotch nobles some who begged her to do so. But the 
letters, messengers, and presents of Elizabeth prevailed, 
she was invited to pass over the Border into England, 
and troops were promised her, by the help of which she 
was to recover her kingdom. 1 But as she had not 
thoroughly learned that they are not to be trusted who 
have abandoned the faith of Christ, she went to Eng 
land against the will of her people, to another prison, 
to be guarded there by other soldiers. 

Not long after her arrival, Mary was placed in the 
custody ; of the earl of Shrewsbury, 2 who treated her 
always with excessive harshness because of her unwaver 
ing profession of the Catholic faith ; but afterwards, 
when she was placed in the charge of others, who were 
more merciless than the earl, her life was a death rather 
than life, for she was tormented in various and un 
seemly ways, and made the butt of false accusations 
wholly undeserved. 3 She was herself a queen, not a 

diplomatibus chirograph urn appon- 
ere, quorum primo regnum oessit 
filiolo vix 13 menses nato." 

1 Blackwood, Martyre de Marie 
Stuart, c. xii. p. 588, ed. Paris, 1644. 
" Elle portoit avec elle le gage 
d amitie que la royne d Angleterre, 
sa sceur, luy avoit envoy6, et les 
lettres qu elle luy avoit escrites, 
pleines d honnestes offres de faveur 
et de secours en sa necessite. Et 
incontinent qu elle fut sortie de 
Lochleveri luy ayant renvoye par 
un gentilhomine expres un diamant 
qu autrefois elle avoit receu d elle 
pour token et gage d amitie, elle luy 
re itera les promesses que Trogmor- 
ton son ambassadeur luy avoit 
faictes avec asseurance de secours 
contre ses rebelles, et mesmement 
s il plaisoit a sa majeste de se retirer 
en Angleterre, qu elle viendroit jus- 
ques sur la frontiere pour la re- 

cevoir et assister en personne de 
tout son pouvoir." Jewell, writing 
to Simler, Aug. 13, 1562 (Zurich. 
Letters, ist series, No. 52), says, 
"The queen of Scotland, niece of 
the duke of Guise, has within 
these few days, by way of court 
ing the favour and friendship of our 
queen, sent her a most splendid and 
valuable diamond, enclosed and fixed 
in a plate of gold, and set off with 
some nattering and elegant verses." 

2 George Talbot, earl marshal; he 
died in 1 590. 

3 Jewell, writing to Bullinger, 
Aug. 7, 1570 (Zurich Letters, ist 
series, No. 91), thus speaks of the 
queen: "The queen of Scots, an 
exile from her country, is, as you 
know, here in custody, with suffi 
cient honour indeed, yet so as that 
she cannot raise any disturbances. 
This is she to whom Pope Pius not 


subject of Elizabeth, nor bound by her laws, but, never 
theless, she could not obtain what is not refused to 
foreign princes and their ambassadors a priest to say 
Mass or to administer the sacraments, that she might 
serve God as her forefathers had done ; and the priva 
tion was a heavier affliction than exile and a prison. 

This treatment of the queen of Scots was strange and 
barbarous, for she was of all people the nearest in blood 
to Elizabeth, and also her invited guest ; nevertheless, 
for these seventeen years, notwithstanding the most 
earnest entreaties, she was never once allowed to speak 
to her, or even to see her. 

But to return. Not very long after the arrival of 
Mary, many noblemen, weary of heresy and of the 
government, especially in the northern counties, took 
up arms in their own defence against the heretics and 
the upstarts who had led Elizabeth into her madness. 
Foremost among these were Thomas earl of Northum 
berland, and Charles earl of Westmoreland, 1 two illus 
trious men of the old nobility. But as the rest of the 
Catholics, on the ground that the Pope had not pub 
lished the sentence of excommunication, and had not 
released them from their allegiance, did not join them, 
they were easily defeated by the queen s troops, 
and driven into Scotland. 2 There the earl of North- 
only freely promises Scotland, but 2 Grindal, writing to Bullinger 
England likewise ; for he hopes that from London, Feb. 18, 1570 (Zurich 
a woman, a Catholic, a murderer of Letters, ist series, Let. 87), says: 
her husband, and an adulteress, will " At the beginning of November two 
have great influence in the restora- earls, those of Northumberland and 
tion of Popery ! We are preparing a Westmoreland, collected troops and 
fleet, and have troops in readiness." raised a rebellion in the counties of 

1 The earl of Westmoreland fell York and Durham, for the purpose 
into honest hands in Scotland, and of restoring the Catholic religion, 
was enabled to make his escape into falsely so called. Their army con- 
the dominions of the emperor in sisted of twelve hundred cavalry 
Flanders, where he lived, but in and four thousand infantry. . . . 
poverty, for some years, dying, ac- The queen then collected an army 
cording to Camden (p. 424), in 1584 of twenty-four thousand men, con- 
or 1585. sisting both of cavalry and infantry, 



umberland was afterwards betrayed and sold to his 


When he was brought back to England they 
offered him his life, if he would give up the faith. He 
refused the offer, and ended his days by a glorious 
martyrdom in York. Those who had followed him, as 
well as those who had followed the earl of Westmore 
land, were diligently sought after everywhere, in order 
that they might be put to death. 

and which the rebel army had not the 
courage to resist. So that on the i6th 
of Dec. the rebels disbanded their in 
fantry. . . . The two earls themselves 
fled into Scotland with a hundred 
chosen troops. But Northumberland 
was taken prisoner by the regent of 
Scotland, where he still remains in 
confinement. Westmoreland, who 
is a young man, and with the spirit 
of a Catiline, is living among free 
booters in the wilds of Scotland. 
Thus was this rebellion suppressed 
within forty days, and without blood 
shed, except that five hundred of the 
rebels were afterwards executed, 
and many are still kept in prison 
awaiting a like punishment. The 
rebel army had on their colours the 
Five Wounds, as they are called, and 
the representation of a cross, with 
this inscription, ( In hoc signo mnces. 
They performed their Masses in 
every church ; the Bibles, moreover, 
translated into our language, which 
are found in all our churches, they 
either tore in pieces or committed 
to the flames. They ransacked the 
property of the bishop of Durham, 
and that of all the pastors and 

ministers ; but they put no one to 
death." Richard Hilles (ibid., 86) 
says, " They not only threw down 
the communion-tables, tore in pieces 
the Holy Bible and godly books, and 
trod under foot the printed Homilies, 
but also again set up the blasphe 
mous Mass as a sacrifice for the 
living and the dead." 

1 Stow, p. 673. " Thomas Percie, 
earl of Northumberland, late of Top- 
cliffe, who had been before attainted 
by Parliament of high treason, as 
being one of the principal conspira 
tors in the late rebellion ; since fled 
into Scotland as is aforeshowed, being 
there taken, was sent to Berwick in 
the month of July, and delivered to 
the Lord Hunsdon, then captain or 
governor of that town, and was now 
on the 22d day of August beheaded 
at York about two of the clock in 
the afternoon, on a new scaffold set 
up for that purpose in the market 
place." The earl of Morton, who had 
been befriended by him when he 
was himself an exile, sold him for 
money -pacta pecunia. Camden (p. 
266) ^ to Lord Hunsdon, Elizabeth s 




WHILE the affairs of England were in this state, some, 
out of the remnant of those who were driven out of the 
schools at home, came together in Douai, 1 and were 
formed into a college there under the direction of Dr. 
William Allen, then the king s professor of theology in 
that university. Philip, the generous king of Spain, 
protected them in their banishment, supplied their 
wants, and gave them the means of continuing their 

1 The college was founded in 1568, 
and in 1575 His Holiness Gregory 
XIII. (Dod, eel. Tierney, ii. 161) 
" gave orders that an allowance of a 
hundred Roman crowns should be 
paid monthly for its subsistence out 
of the treasury of the Holy See. 
This was afterwards augmented to 
an annual pension of two thousand 
crowns, which is continued to this 

Collegii Anglo-Duaceni Diarium, i. 
3. " Anno Domini nostri JesuChristi 
millesimo quingentesimo sexagesimo 
octavo, cum hoc egregium opus,divina 
fretus misericordia et benignitate, in- 
choaret reverendus Dominus, Domi- 
nus Guilielmus Alanus doctus et 
pins sacerdos, postea sanctae Romanse 
Ecclesise Cardinalis presbyter, Anglise 
nuncupatus primes sui collegii 
alumnos habuit sex Sacrse Theologies 
studiosos sibi subditos, quatuor qui- 
dem Anglos, et duos Belgas. Qui 
omnes ex piorum quorundam abba- 
turn et aliorum benefactorum elee- 
mosinis, industria Domini Alani col- 
lectis, vixerunt in unis simul sedibus 
in Universitate Duacensi. 

" Angli erant isti : Richardus 
Bristous, Vigorniensis ; Joannes 
Martialis,postea canonicus Insulensis; 
Edouardus Risdenus, postea Carthu- 
sianus ; Joannes Whitus. Belgjs 
autem Joannes Ravastonus, Simon 

"Huic porro coctui continenter se 
adjunxit Dominus Morganus Philip- 
pus, venerabilis sacerdos, quon 
dam ejusdem Alani in Universitate 
Oxonienis prseceptor, nunc vero in 
hoc saneto opere, et vivus coadjutor 
et moriens insignia benefactor." 

Morgan Philips was one of the 
disputants at Oxford when Peter 
Martyr attempted the defence of his 
heresies in May 1549 (bk. ii. ch. iii.) 
He was made principal of St. Mary s 
Hall in 1546, and resigned in 1550. 
In the beginning of queen Mary s 
reign he was made precentor of St. 
David s, and on the accession of 
Elizabeth went abroad, and died 
at Douai, 1577. Cardinal Allen 
was the fourth principal of St. 
Mary s Hall in succession to Morgan 


studies. Tho college prospered as time went on, sup 
ported at first by the alms of good people, and after 
wards by the munificence of the Apostolic See. Many 
admirable priests were trained in it, who from time to 
time were sent to England, there to revive the Catholic 
faith ; and on the other hand, the men of goodwill were 
received within its walls who came from England to 
learn the truth. So that soon after the foundation of 
the college there was a great change in men s minds, as 
well as a great many conversions, in England. 

The college was so hateful to the heretics, that they 
obtained the expulsion of its members from Douai, by 
the help of the Belgians, without much difficulty, the 
Belgians being at this time a prey to sedition. 1 But 
afterwards, in the providence of God, and by the per 
mission of the most Christian king, the college was 
removed to Eheims, 2 where it flourishes at this day. 
It has grown into ample proportions, and ecclesiastical 
studies are thriving within it. In order to gather in a 
more abundant harvest, Pope Gregory XIII., 3 of most 
blessed memory, founded another college in Rome itself, 
in the ancient hospital of our nation, endowing it at the 

1 Dod, ed. Tierney, ii. 165. was sent from Douai to Ulieims to 
"Those that have searched into the learn the dispositions of the uni- 
bottom of the affair tell us that all versity there, as it seems from the 
the disturbance was occasioned by Douai Diary, ad ann. 1576, p. 113 : 
the Huguenots, who, out of hatred "Eodem die [Nov. 10, 1576] ad 
to religion or for the hopes of plun- Academiam Remenseni hinc a nobis 
der, lay privately in the town, and missi sunt D. Writtus, Sacrse Theo- 
instilled such notions into the com- logioo baccalaureus, et D. Rishtonus, 
nion people, as if the English that S. Theolog. studioaus, ut et illius 
resided amongst them were in the loci commoditatem et Academise 
French interest." erga nos voluntatem explorarent. 

2 Ibid., p. 164. "They arrived Qui eo accedentes humanissime re- 
at Rheims, March 27, 1578. The cepti sunt, et omnia nobis, si adven- 
rest followed by degrees, excepting taverimus, ad nostram voluntatem 
two or three persons that were per- libentissimis animis paratissima fore 
mitted to remain in the house, which promissa sunt." 

they kept possession of for fifteen 3 The Bull Quoniam divince boni- 

years, till the college returned again tati is dated April 23, 1579, and may 

to Douay." be seen in the Appendix to Dod, ed. 

The writer of this fourth book Tierney, ii. p. cccxxxvii. 


same time witli ample revenues, and placing it under 
the care and direction of the Fathers of the Society of 
Jesus. These two colleges have in our days sent to the 
English harvest more than three hundred priests, who 
have also watered with their consecrated blood the field 
of our Lord in that country. 

One thing there is in this matter marvellous to 
observe, and which we can assign to nothing else but to 
the finger of God. While even in Catholic countries 
there are many who become priests only for honour and 
gain, the members of these colleges among whom are 
noblemen and eldest sons not a few without any hope 
of reward, yea, rather with the loss of their heritage, 
with the certainty of disgrace, danger, and even death, 
so eagerly desire and receive the priesthood, that no 
fear of shame or of loss, no persuasion of kindred and 
of friends according to the flesh, can shake their holy 

The councillors of Elizabeth at first despised the 
poor beginnings of the seminary of Douai. They 
thought, and they said so too, that those who might be 
trained in the college, or even become priests, would, 
compelled by want or tempted by gain, return some 
day to England, accept a benefice, and minister in the 
Anglican churches according to the laws and teaching 
of the state. But if any among them should be ob 
stinate, and refuse to conform, they would be able to do 
nothing ; for what could a few poor and homeless men 
such is the judgment of the world do against their 
new Church, which was under the protection of so 
mighty a queen, 1 guarded by such severe laws, watched 

1 Hooker, Dedication of the fifth hitherto been God s most happy 

book of his "Ecclesiastical Polity," p. instrument, by Him miraculously 

Ii,ed.0xon., 1836. " Her especially, kept for works of so miraculous 

whose sacred power with iucom- preservation and safety unto others, 

parable goodness of nature hath that as By the sword of God and 


over by such diligent ministers, and so effectually de 
fended on every side ? But before many years were 
over it was observed that very many young men, pos 
sessed of great gifts, went from the schools and the uni 
versities to the colleges beyond the seas, and came back 
before long as priests to their native land, where by 
preaching, by their writings and example, by the 
ministration of the sacraments in secret, by reconciling 
men to the Church, by withdrawing them from schism, 
and from their attendance upon the sacrilegious rites 
of the heretics for many Englishmen at that time, 
men who in their hearts believed aright, had thus 
defiled themselves through fear of the laws they made 
a great impression upon innumerable souls. Then the 
queen s advisers, when they saw this, and that the 
country, the towns, the universities, the houses of the 
nobility, and even the court itself, were full of converts, 
began to bewail their mistake, and by cruel laws, 1 by 
every human means and contrivance, and by spreading 
terror far and near, to set themselves against the work, 
which we believe to be the work of God. 

The Catholic Church was governed, when the semin 
ary was founded, by Pius V., another Phinees, who with 
the utmost diligence pursued heretics, Turks, and other 
unbelievers with a zeal wholly beseeming the sovereign 
Pontiff. He is, as I believe, the first who authorised 
not only the members of the seminary, but the other 
most learned priests to go to England, and who gave them 
diverse spiritual powers necessary for the furtherance 
of so good a work. He issued an Apostolic Brief, and 
placed all the missioners, to avoid dissensions, under 

Gideon was sometime the cry of God and His servant Elizabeth we 

the people of Israel, so it might are." 

deservedly be at this day ... the l 27 Eliz. c. 2. " An act against 

true inscription, style, or title of all Jesuits, seminary priests, and other 

Churches as yet standing within this suchlike disobedient persons." 
realm, By the goodness of Almighty 


the direction of Allen. Then in the same spirit of 
fortitude in which he formed the Holy League against 
the Turk, the most cruel enemy of Christ, and with the 
help of the Catholic king and other states, undertook 
that most glorious war against him, he pronounced 
against Elizabeth sentence of excommunication and 


deposition in the following words : 

" Sentence declaratory of our sovereign Lord the 
Pope Pius Y. against Elizabeth, pretended queen of 
England, and the heretics who abet her, whereby all 
subjects are declared released from the oath of allegi 
ance, and every other bond, and those who hereafter 
shall obey her, bound by the bond of anathema. 

"Pius, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, in 
memorial of the matter. 

" The sovereign jurisdiction of the one holy Catholic 
and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salva 
tion, has been given by Him, unto "Whom all power in 
heaven and on earth is given, the King who reigns on 
high, to but one person on the face of the earth, to 
Peter, prince of the Apostles, and to the successor of 
Peter, the Bishop of Eome. Him He has set up over 
all nations, and over all kingdoms, to root up and 
destroy, to waste and to scatter, to plant and to build, 
to the end that he may maintain in the unity of the 
spirit the faithful people bound together by the bond 
of charity, and present them unto Him their Saviour 
perfect and without loss. 

" In the discharge of this duty, We, whom God of His 
goodness has called to the government of His Church, 
shrink from no labour, striving with all .Our might to 
preserve in their integrity that very unity and the 
Catholic religion, which are now assailed by so many 
storms, by His permission from Whom they come, for 


our correction, and for the trial of the faith of His 
children. But the wicked are so many, and are growing 
so strong, that there is no part of the world which they 
have not attempted by their evil doctrines to corrupt ; 
among others labouring for this end is the servant of 
iniquity, Elizabeth, the pretended queen of England, 
with whom, as in a safe refuge, the worst of these men 
have found a secure retreat. 

" This woman having taken possession of the kingdom, 
unnaturally claims for herself the place, the great autho 
rity and jurisdiction of the sovereign head of the Church 
throughout all England, and has involved in miserable 
ruin that kingdom so lately recovered to the Catholic 
faith and piety. 

" She has forbidden by the strong hand of power the 
observance of the true religion, overturned by the 
apostate Henry VIII. , and by the help of the Holy See 
restored by Mary, the lawful queen, of illustrious memory. 
She has followed after and accepted the errors of heretics. 
She has driven the English nobles out of the royal council, 
and filled their places with obscure heretics. She has 
been the ruin of those who profess the Catholic faith, and 
has brought back again the wicked preachers and 
ministers of impieties. She has done away with the 
sacrifice of the Mass, the Divine Office, fasting, the 
distinction of meats, celibacy, and the Catholic rites. 
She has ordered the use of books, containing mani 
fest heresy, throughout the realm, and the observance 
by her subjects of impious mysteries and ordinances, 
according to the rule of Calvin, accepted and practised 
by herself. 

" She has dared to take away their churches and 
benefices from the bishops, the parish priests, and other 
Catholic ecclesiastics, and has given them with other 
ecclesiastical goods to heretics. She has made herself a 


judge in ecclesiastical causes. She has forbidden the 
prelates, clergy, and people to acknowledge the Church 
of Kome, or to obey its mandates and the Catholic con 
stitutions. She has compelled many to take an oath to 
observe her wicked laws, to renounce the authority of 
the Eoman Pontiff, to refuse to obey him, and to accept 
her as the sole ruler in temporal and spiritual matters. 
She has decreed pains and penalties against those who 
do not submit to her, and has inflicted them upon those 
who continue in the unity of the faith and obedience. 

" She has thrown Catholic prelates and parish priests 
into prison, where many, worn out by sorrows and their 
protracted sufferings, have ended their days in misery. 

"All this being notorious and known unto all nations, 
and so confirmed by very many grave witnesses, as to 
leave no room for palliation, defence, or concealment, 
sin being added to sin, and iniquity to iniquity, the 
persecution of the faithful, and the ruin of religion 
daily growing more and more at the suggestion and 
under the direction of Elizabeth aforesaid, whose will 
is so obstinate and whose heart is so hardened that 
she has set at nought not only the charitable prayers 
and counsels of Catholic princes entreating her to return 
to a better mind and be converted, but also Our own by 
her refusal to allow the Nuncios of the Holy See to enter 
the realm, "We, having recourse, by necessity compelled, 
to the weapons of justice, are unable to control Our grief 
that We must proceed against one whose predecessors 
have rendered signal services to Christendom. 

" Eelying then on His authority who has placed Us on 
this sovereign throne of justice, though unequal to the 
bearing of so great a burden, We declare, in the fulness 
of the apostolic power, the aforesaid Elizabeth a heretic, 
and an encourager of heretics, together with those who 


abet her, under the sentence of excommunication, cut 
off from the unity of the Body of Christ. 

" Moreover, We declare that she has forfeited her pre 
tended title to the aforesaid kingdom, to all and every right, 
dignity, and privilege ; We also declare that the nobles, 
the subjects, and the people of the kingdom aforesaid, who 
have taken any oath to her, are for ever released from that 
oath, and from every obligation of allegiance, fealty, and 
obedience, as We now by these letters release them, and 
deprive the said Elizabeth of her pretended right to the 
throne, and every other right whatsoever aforesaid : We 
command all and singular the nobles, the people subject 
to her, and others aforesaid, never to venture to obey her 
monitions, mandates, and laws. 

"If any shall contravene this Our decree, We bind 
them with the same bond of anathema. 

" Seeing that it would be a work of too much difficulty 
to send these letters to every place where it is necessary 
to send them, Our will is that a copy thereof by a public 
notary, sealed with the seal of an ecclesiastical prelate, 
or with the seal of his court, shall have the same force 
in courts of law and everywhere throughout the world 
that these letters themselves have if they be produced 
and shown. 

" Given at St. Peter s in Eome, in the year of the 
Incarnation of our Lord one thousand five hundred and 
sixty-nine, on the fifth of the calends of March, 1 in the 
fifth year of Our Pontificate. 



1 Feb. 25, 1570, according to the began the year on the 25th of 
present computation, for St. Pius March. 

( 305 ) 





ONE or two persons of greater zeal, because they made 
known and defended the Apostolic Letters, were shortly 
afterwards condemned to a traitor s death which they 
courageously underwent l in London, where the Letters 
had been placed on the very doors of the palace of the 
sham bishop. 2 The rest of the Catholics continued to 
obey the queen, either because they did not admit the 
legal publication of the Apostolic Letters, and saw that 
the neighbouring princes and the Catholic countries had 
not refrained from their usual intercourse with the 
queen, or because they had no knowledge that the 
letters were issued again and confirmed by the Pope 
who succeeded Pius V., who died soon after the first 
publication, 3 or because they were afraid to stir, though 
they might give the other reasons for their conduct. 

On the other hand, the heretics pretended to despise 
utterly the Bull in public, as if it were nothing more 
than a bugbear to frighten children, though in reality 
they were in great trouble, knowing well that in all 
time past the issues had been disastrous. It was said 

1 John Felton, of whom more will 3 St. Pius V. issued the Apostolic 
be said below. See p. 316, note 5. Letters Feb. 25, 1570. He died May 

2 This was Edwin Sandys, who i, 157 2, and was succeeded by Gregory- 
removed from "Worcester A.D. 1570 to XIII. May 13, 1572. 

London, and thence to York A.D. 1 5 77. 



that they strove hard in Eome, through certain great 
personages, and in secret, to obtain the revocation of the 
sentence, but all to no purpose. As we read of Saul 
that the spirit of fear and uneasiness, rage also, and an 
incredible hatred of the priests of God took possession 
of his troubled soul when he heard the sentence which 
Samuel had pronounced upon him, so also was it now ; 
from that day forth the queen and her advisers had no 
peace, for the prosperity of the Catholic Church thence 
forward ever growing troubled them as the prosperity of 
David troubled Saul. It was a special source of vexation 
to them that this sentence was that of a Pope who, in 
the opinion of all good men, was a saint, and whom the 
Protestants themselves regarded as one of the best Popes 
for many generations. 

The queen, made angry by the sentence, and by the 
daily increase of the Catholics, called a Parliament, in 
which savage and bloody laws were passed against those 
who held the ancient faith. To say that queen Elizabeth 
was a heretic, or schismatic, or an infidel, or usurper of 
the crown, was to be high treason ; and it was forbidden 
to speak of any one as having a right to the throne 
during the queen s lifetime, or after her death, unless that 
person be the natural issue of Elizabeth. These are the 
very words of the statute. 1 

Next, because priests and other devout persons began 
about this time the practice of bringing into the country, 
for the comfort of Catholics, divers sacred things, it 
is enacted in Parliament that every one shall suffer 
the loss of all his goods, and be imprisoned for life, 

1 13 Eliz. c. i : "The natural Leicester in order that he might be 

issue of her "body." Camden (An- able to put one of his own bastards 

nales, ii. 241) says that he being then on the throne : " Ut aliquem ipsius 

a young man, heard it often stated ex pellice spurium pro regince sobole 

that the words " natural issue " were naturali Anglis tandem aliquando 

inserted in the act by the earl of obtruderet." 


who shall bring in, accept, or carry about him any 
sacred things usually sent from Eome as tokens of 
ecclesiastical communion, such as Agnus Dei, crucifixes, 
pictures, rosaries, or any other thing whatsoever, blessed 
by the Pope or by his authority. It is also made a 
capital offence to procure from Rome any Bulls, Briefs, 
Instruments, or writings of any kind whatsoever. At 
the same time, in order to check the salutary labours 
of the priests, it is made high treason to absolve any 
one from heresy or schism, or to reconcile any one to 
the Roman Church, or to be absolved or reconciled, in 
the sacrament of penance. 1 

Further, in the same Parliament 2 it was enacted that 
all those who crossed the seas on account of religion 
should forfeit all their goods and chattels, in order that 
they might not have wherewithal to subsist on so long 
as they lived abroad. And as many devout Catholics 
broke the law, or came within its meshes, they were 
punished : some were thrown into prison, others lost 
their possessions, and others were put to death, priests 
and lay people, men and women, high and low. 

Among the memorable events of these times, in which 
innocent Catholics were everywhere made to suffer, is 
that which took place in the city and university of 
Oxford. One Rowland Jenks 3 was arraigned as a 

1 13 Eliz. c. 2. weeks space, namely, from the 6th 

2 13 Eliz. c. 3. of July to the I2th of August for 

3 Rowland Jenks was a bookseller no longer did this violent infection 
in Oxford, whom Camden (Annales, continue were 300 in Oxford and 
ii. 316) calls a man procacis lin- 200 and odd in other places, so that 
guce, which means that he neither the whole number that died in that 
denied nor concealed his belief. He time were 510 persons." But among 
was condemned in the Black Assizes all those who died there was not 
of 1 5 77. " Judgment being passed," one woman or child. Notwithstand- 
says Wood (Annals, ii. 188), "there ing the visitation, Rowland Jenks, 
arose such an infectious damp or according to Wood (ibid., p. 192), 
breath . . . above 600 sickened in " suffered the sentence passed upon, 
one night, as a physician that now him : went to Douai, and there 
lived in Oxford attesteth. . . . The became baker to the College of Eng- 
nmnber of persons that died in five lish seculars, and lived to be a very 

3 o8 


[BOOK iv. 

Catholic, found guilty, and being but one of the common 
people, was condemned to lose both his ears. But the 
judge had hardly delivered the sentence when a deadly 
disease suddenly attacked the whole court ; l no other 
parts of the city, and no persons not in the court, were 
touched. The disease laid hold in a moment of all the 
judges, the high sheriff, and the twelve men of the jury, 
whose duty it is, according to the custom of the country, 
to say whether a prisoner be guilty or not. The jury 
men died immediately, the judges, the lawyers, and the 
high sheriff died, some of them within a few hours, 
others within a few days, but all of them died. Not ]ess 
than five hundred persons who caught the same disease 
at the same time and place, died soon after in different 
places outside the city. 

At this time God confounded the tongues of the heretics 
in England. A new sect of rigid Calvinists, namely, 
the Puritans, 2 by its writings and preaching, disturbed 

old man, to the year 1610 and up 
wards, as I have been informed by 
one that knew him there, Mr. Jo. 

Anglo-Duacen. Diarium secun- 
dmn, p. 127. "Hie [Mr. Methamlno- 
bis enarravit Catholicum quendam 
[Rowland Jenks] Oxonii tanquam 
133S33 majestatis reum coram judici- 
bus sisti, ibique per duos falsos testes 
gravissimorum verborum contra re- 
ginae reique publicse statum accusari, 
per duodecim etiam ut mos nostraa 
gentis est juratos viros criminosum 
inveniri, ac denique per ipsos judices 
condemnari ; postea autem tarn mor- 
tiferam tabem omnes turn judices et 
falsos testes, cum etiam ipsos pro- 
vincise Oxoniensis vice-comites, duo 
decim juratos viros ac alios non- 
nullos turn nobiles cum laicos in- 
vasisse, ut qui intra bidui spatium 
ea morte expirarent plus quam qua- 
dringenti numerarentur." 

1 Stow, p. 681. "The 4th, 5th, 
and 6th of July [1577] were the 

assizes holden at Oxford, where was 
arraigned and condemned one Row 
land Jenkes for his seditious tongue, 
at which time there arose amidst 
the people such a damp that almost 
all were smothered, very few escaped 
that were not taken at that instant. 
The jurors died presently. Shortly 
after died Sir Robert Bell, lord chief 
baron, Sir Robert de Olie, Sir 
William Babington, Master Wene- 
ham, Master de Olie, high sheriff, 
Master Davers, Master Harcurt, 
Master Kirle, Master Phereplace, 
Master Greenwood, Master Foster, 
Master Nash, Serjeant Baram, Mas 
ter Stevens, &c. There died in Ox 
ford 300 persons, and sickened there, 
but died in other places, 200 and 
odd from the 6th of July to the I2th 
of August, after which day died not 
one of that sickness, for one of them 
infected not another, nor any one 
woman or child died thereof." 

2 Sandys, writing to Gualter from 
London, Dec. 9, 1579 (Zurich Letter*, 


exceedingly the ordinary Protestants, whose recent royal 
or parliamentary belief, worship, and government were 
denounced as impious and superstitious in more than a 
hundred points. By this quarrel of the heretics the 
Catholics grew in number every day, and more resolute 
in the profession of the faith. 

There was much talk at this time among the Catholics 
of the admirable training, order, and learning of the 
Fathers of the Society of Jesus, how much they were in 
favour with God and man. There w^as also a very great 
desire on the part of the English to profit by their 
labours. Earnest representations were therefore made 
to the superiors of the society the Pope himself ex 
erted his authority to the same end that they should 
send some of their own subjects, especially the most dis 
tinguished Englishmen who were in the order, to labour 
in the British harvest ; for many men of great piety and 
learning had during their exile entered the society. 

Eobert Persons and Edmund Campian, 1 men endowed 
with great gifts of God, were the first who were chosen. 
With them were sent also from both the English colleges 
some priests, admirably fitted for the work, who executed 
the mission given them by their superiors with such 

ist series, No. 134), says, " These or the ministration of the" sacra- 
new men, whom we call Puritans, merits, all these things are now 
who tread all authority under foot." openly attacked from the press, and 
In a former letter to the same per- it is contended with the greatest 
son, Aug. 9, 1574 (ibid., No. 124), bitterness that they are not to be 
he says, u The author of these endured in the Church of Christ, 
novelties, and, after Beza, the first The doctrine alone they leave nn- 
inventor is a young Englishman, by touched : as to everything else, by 
name Thomas Cartwright, who, they whatever name you call it, they 
say, is now sojourning at Heidel- are clamorous for its removal. The 
berg." Pilkington, writing to the godly mourn, the Papists exult, that 
same person, July 20, 1573 (ibid., we are now fighting against each 
No. no), says, "Not only the habits, other, who were heretofore wont to 
but our whole ecclesiastical polity, attack them with our united forces." 
discipline, the revenues of the l Father Persons landed at Dover 
bishops [Pilkington was a "bishop], June 12, 1580, and Father Campian 
ceremonies or public forms of wor- June 25, in the same year, 
ship, liturgies, vocation of ministers, 


readiness, faith, and diligence that in a very few months, 
by their exhortations from house to house, by their 
sermons and their writings, and the ministration of 
the sacraments, they brought the people in countless 
numbers to the Church, and very many too who were 
illustrious for their noble birth and their great learning. 

These labours are met at first with the most threaten 
ing proclamations * by the enemy. All the Jesuits, all 
the priests and students of the two foreign colleges, are 
declared guilty of high treason, and said to be the con 
trivers of divers conspiracies against the queen and the 
state ; all parents and guardians are therefore com 
manded to recall those under their charge as soon as 
possible; merchants and others are forbidden under 
penalties to send money to those colleges, or to any of 
the members of the same ; and every person whatsoever 
is forbidden to receive the priests into their houses, or 
help them in any way. These orders were issued by the 
sole authority of the queen, 2 but they were afterwards, 
as shall be shown further on, set forth and allowed in 

Then, seeing the temples and conventicles of the 
heretics in many places forsaken, Parliament is assembled, 
and a law is made " that every person above the age of 
sixteen years " who shall refuse to frequent the prayers, 
the sermons, and churches of the Protestants, shall forfeit 
for every month twenty pounds of lawful English 
money, 3 by which ruthless extortions the Catholics 
were afterwards marvellously plundered. 

1 Stow, p. 688. "About the I2th the retaining of Jesuits and massing 

of January [1581] proclamation was priests, sowers of sedition and other 

published at London for the revoca- treasonable attempts," &c. 

tion of sundry the queen s majesty s 2 A proclamation of the queen, 

subjects remaining beyond the seas, dated Jan. 10, 1581, may be seen in 

under the colour of study, and liv- Strype, Annals, iii. 40, and in Dod, 

ing contrary to the laws of God and ed. Tierney, iii. xxi. 

of the realm. And also against 3 23 Eliz. c. I, s. 5. 


It was also enacted in the same Parliament that any 
one who persuaded another in any way to forsake the 
religion now observed in England, was guilty of high 
treason. 1 

The pains and penalties to be inflicted on those who 
hear or say Mass, according to the law made in the first 
year of the queen s reign, are doubled, 2 and the Catholics 
bore it almost patiently for the love of Christ. 

Meanwhile, for the better execution of these bloody 
laws, pursuivants and spies are sent into the houses 
of noblemen, and of others who kept the faith, to 
drag the priests, with those who entertain them and 
those who help them, into prison, to subject them to 
merciless torture, and to rob them of their property, 
and sometimes to put them to death. People are 
encouraged to betray and apprehend Jesuits and priests 
by the offer of large rewards, and the pardon of their 
crimes to men of the most worthless sort. Accord 
ingly so many persons of all ranks are seized that new 
prisons are made in divers places, the existing prisons 
being insufficient for the priests and other Catholics upon 
whom they now lay hands. The venerable old man the 
bishop of Lincoln, the abbot of "Westminster, and other 
confessors, still older, have been sent to Wisbech Castle, 8 

1 23 Eliz. c. I, s. 2. "Shall have Domirmm Watsonum ^ episcopum 
judgment, suffer and forfeit, as in Lincolnieiisem et Domimim Feck- 
case of high treason." namum abbatem monasterii West- 

2 23 Eliz. c. I, s. 4. " Every person monasteriensis aliosque aliquot doc- 
which shall say or sing Mass, ... tos et graves viros, videlicet, Domi- 
shall forfeit the sum of 200 marks, num. Woode, Domimim Mettamum, 
and be committed to prison . . . for DommumBluettum,Dommum Uxs- 
one year . . . Every person which bridge j uris doctorem, et, quod opinor, 
shall willingly hear Mass, shall for- alios quorum non sunt ad nos delate 
feit the sum of 100 marks, and suffer nomina, a carceribus quibus Londini 
imprisonment for a year." inclusi tenebantur ad alium vilem et 

3 Colleg. Anglo-DuaceniDiar., ii.p. foetidum carcerem, in loco paludoso 
171. " Eodem tempore [Septembris non procul a Cantabrigia disjuncto, 
1 8, I58o]exliterisetquorundamser- situm, qui quidem nostra lingua 
monibus ex Anglia venientium, cog- dicitur Wisbidge Castle, missos esse, 
iiovimus reverendos inChristo patres ibique incarcerates." 


a pestilential prison in the fens of Ely, where they have 
been done to death without difficulty. 

Among others who at this time fell into their hands 
was the illustrious Father Campian. 1 A false brother, 
like another Judas, betrayed him. 2 He is apprehended, 
mocked, and laid in irons, put on the rack, and his 
very bones are loosened in their sockets. At the same 
time many persons are thrown into prison, not only the 
common people, but peers and gentlemen, because they 
had either received Father Campian into their houses or 
had absented themselves from the churches of the Pro 
testants. Out of prison, in company with thieves and 
robbers, they are taken into court to be tried, and there 
heavily fined. The greatest indignities of this kind 
were inflicted on Lord Vaux, 3 Sir Thomas Tresham, 4 Sir 
William Catesby, 5 and on many others throughout the 

1 Butler s Hist. Mem., chap, xxxiii. 
s. 3. " On the 1 5th of July 1 58 1 he 
was apprehended in a secret room 
in the house of a Catholic gentleman. 
After remaining during two days in 
the custody of the sheriff of Berk 
shire, he was conveyed by slow jour 
neys to London on horseback, his legs 
fastened under the horse, his arms 
tied behind him, and a paper placed 
on his hat, on which in large capital 
letters were written the words/ Cam 
pian, the seditious Jesuit. He was 
taken to the Tower July 22, and twice 
tortured in secret." 

Anglo-Duacen. Diar., ii. p. 181. 
" Hoc fere tempore [Aug. 1581], au- 
divimus Patrem Edmundum Cam- 
pianum, Georgii Elioti falsi fratris 
opera, ab haereticis captum, et cum 
aliis decem.magno stipatum comitatu 
Londinum adductum fuisse. Inter 
autem illos decem tres erant sacer- 
dotes, alumni nostri seminarii, vide 
licet, Dominus Thomas Fordus, Do- 
minus Colingtonus, Dominus Filbeus, 
junior. PatrisEdmundigalero dum 
per plateas Londinenses, ut omnium 
ludibrio exponeretur, ductus est 

certain quandam aiunt affixam fuisse, 
in qua litteris majusculis hsec verba 
erant inscripta : Hie est ille sedi- 
tiosus Jesuita Edmundus Campianus. 
Hunc etiam bis misere tortumo,equule 
carcere inclusum tenent, qui ante- 
quam caperetur, brevem sed elegan- 
tem latiiie scriptum contra hsereticos 
libellum edidit." 

2 This was George Eliot, once a 
servant of Lady Petre. 

3 Lord Vaux, the third baron of 
his family, William Vaux, who suc 
ceeded A.i). 1562. He died A.D. 1595, 
succeeded by his grandson, Edward 

4 Fr. Morris, Condition of Catholics, 
p. 90. " Often in prison for his con 
science, although he paid the statute 
duty besides of 20 a month for his 
refusing to go to church with here 

6 Ibid., p. 55. " Sir William Cates 
by ... being a Catholic, and often in 
prison for his faith, suffered many 
losses, and much impaired his estate." 
His son was Mr. Catesby, known for 
his share in the Gunpowder Plot. 



kingdom, men admirable for their perseverance, faith, 
and devotion. 1 

It was not thought safe to put Father Campian and 
the other priests to death merely because they preached 
the Catholic faith, for the minds of Englishmen at this 
time were deeply impressed in its favour. Accordingly 
it is pretended, in order to have a more specious excuse, 
that he and others had in